Yes, we hit this with the new load balanced queues (which, to be fair, we also had with remote process groups previously). Two "old" nodes got saturated and their queues filled while three "new" nodes were fine.
My "solution" was to move everything to new hardware which we had inbound anyway. On Wed, 6 Mar 2019, 20:40 Jon Logan, <jmlo...@buffalo.edu> wrote: > You may run into issues with different processing power, as some machines > may be overwhelmed in order to saturate other machines. > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 3:34 PM Mark Payne <marka...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Chad, >> >> This should not be a problem, given that all nodes have enough storage >> available to handle the influx of data. >> >> Thanks >> -Mark >> >> >> > On Mar 6, 2019, at 1:44 PM, Chad Woodhead <chadwoodh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Are there any negative effects of having filesystem mounts (dedicated >> mounts for each repo) used by the different NiFi repositories differ in >> size on NiFi nodes within the same cluster? For instance, if some nodes >> have a content_repo mount of 130 GB and other nodes have a content_repo >> mount of 125 GB, could that cause any problems or cause one node to be used >> more since it has more space? What about if the difference was larger, by >> say a 100 GB difference? >> > >> > Trying to repurpose old nodes and add them as NiFi nodes, but their >> mount sizes are different than my current cluster’s nodes and I’ve noticed >> I can’t set the max size limit to use of a particular mount for a repo. >> > >> > -Chad >> >>
