Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
Kafka >> mail # user >> Architecture Consulting

Guy Doulberg 2012-06-19, 13:12
Tim Lossen 2012-06-19, 15:53
Copy link to this message
‏‏RE: Architecture Consulting
Hןi Tom,
Thanks for you replay,

Do in your implementation you have enrichment process?
If so, how do you perform the enrichment on each of the topics?
Thanks, Guy

‏‏מאת: Tim Lossen [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
‏‏נשלח: ‏‏יום שלישי 19 יוני 2012 18:53
‏‏נושא: Re: Architecture Consulting

well, we decided to go with one topic per game (approach 2),
as there are some consumers which are only interested in data
from a single topic. makes it a bit harder for consumers interested
in processing ALL events though.

not knowing more about your concrete situation, it is difficult
to decide what is better in your case.

On 2012-06-19, at 15:12 , Guy Doulberg wrote:

> Hi all,
> We'd like to consult with you about our Kafka architecture,
> We have Http endpoints that receive events from the web, and push them into the system via kafka. The events are distinguishable by their HTTP url, and are sharded to their corresponding topics.
> We have 2 designs in mind:
> 1. One main 'raw' topic, split to multiple enriched topics.
> The endpoints write to one kafka topic, lets call it 'Raw topic'.
> The above 'raw topic' is consumed by some kafka consumer which does the following:
> i - enrich the data (extract ip-to-location info, standardize browser/os type, etc)
> ii -feed the enriched data to a new topic, based on the referrer information.
> 2. Multiple 'raw' topics each fed to its corresponding 'enriched' topic.
> Have the web endpoints shard the events based on their referrer, creating multiple 'raw' topics, one per referrer type/domain.
> Each 'raw' topic is then consumed, and a corresponding enriched stream/topic is created from it.
> The dilemma is weather to  do the separation to topics as soon as we can, at the web endpoint (option 2)
> or to postpone it as much as possible (option 1).....
> I prefer option 1 , but tests I ran, reveaI that in a scenario where there are many event types in the same topic, and some event types have many more occurrences than others, the more frequent event types seem to "drown" the less common ones, which roughly translates to the fact that less common events may appear at their consumer side much later in time than the more frequent ones.
> If my system requires a 'timely' processing of events, this behaviour poses a problem.
> What do you think? thanks

Tim Lossen 2012-06-19, 22:22
Jun Rao 2012-06-19, 16:14
Tarun Kumar 2012-06-20, 02:51