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

Switch to Plain View
Flume, mail # user - Best way to increase throughput of Exec->Memory->Avro agent.


+
Chris Neal 2013-03-12, 20:43
+
Roshan Naik 2013-03-12, 21:10
+
Roshan Naik 2013-03-12, 21:12
+
Chris Neal 2013-03-12, 21:24
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Best way to increase throughput of Exec->Memory->Avro agent.
Roshan Naik 2013-03-12, 21:35
Even 16 on a single channel might be on the higher side IMHO.

Try instead splitting into four channels with 4 sinks each... or even
four agents with one channel and 4 sinks each ..... it will reduce
contention. be careful to ensure your capacity of each channel is not
too high since you now have many channels.
-roshan

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Chris Neal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the reply.  You're definitely on to something with the
> ever-increasing number of sinks.  :)
>
> I scaled it back to 16 AvroSinks, and used a
> MemoryChannel.transactionCapacity of 1000, and AvroSink.batch-size of 1000.
> My ExecSource.batchSize is 100 (I chose this smaller number because there
> are so many of them (124), I didn't want 10s of thousands of events getting
> dropped on the MemoryChannel at once, rather just 1000s).  With those
> settings, things are keeping the MemoryChannel drained.  Finally getting
> somewhere! :)
>
> Much appreciate the prompt response.  If anything else comes to mind, please
> do let me know.
>
> Thanks again.
> Chris
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Roshan Naik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> i meant 640,000 not 64,000
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Roshan Naik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > beyond a certain # of sinks it wont help adding more. my suspicion is
>> > you may have gone way overboard.
>> >
>> >  if your sink-side batch size is that large and you have 64 sinks in
>> > the round-robin.. it will take a lot of events (64,000) to be pumped
>> > in by the source order before the first event can start trickling out
>> > of any sink.  Also memory consumption will be quite high.. each sink
>> > will open a transaction and hold on to 10000 events. This the cause
>> > for the Memory channel filling up. Until the sink side transaction is
>> > committed (i.e 10k events are pulled), the memory reservation on the
>> > channel is not relinquished. So your memory channel size will have to
>> > really high to support so manch sinks each with such a big batch size.
>> >
>> > My gut feel is that your source-side batch size is not much of an
>> > issue and can be smaller. Increasing the number of sinks will only
>> > help if the sink is indeed the bott
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Chris Neal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Hi all.
>> >>
>> >> I've been working on this for quite some time, and need some advice
>> >> from the
>> >> experts.  I have a two tiered Flume architecture:
>> >>
>> >> App Tier (all on one server):
>> >>  124 ExecSources -> MemoryChannel -> AvroSinks
>> >>
>> >> HDFS Tier (on two servers):
>> >>   AvroSource -> FileChannel -> HDFSSinks
>> >>
>> >> When I run the agents, the HDFS tier is keeping up fine with the App
>> >> Tier.
>> >> queue sizes stay between 0-10000 (I have a batch size of 10000).  All
>> >> is
>> >> good.
>> >>
>> >> On the App Tier, when I view the JMX data through jconsole, I watch the
>> >> size
>> >> of the MemoryChannel grow steadily until it reaches the max, then it
>> >> starts
>> >> throwing exceptions about not being able to put the batch on the
>> >> channel as
>> >> expected.
>> >>
>> >> There seems to be two basic ways to increase the throughput of the App
>> >> Tier:
>> >> 1.  Increase the MemoryChannel's transactionCapacity and the
>> >> corresponding
>> >> AvroSink's batch-size.  Both are set to 10000 for me.
>> >> 2.  Increase the number of AvroSinks to drain the MemoryChannel.  I'm
>> >> up to
>> >> 64 Sinks now which round-robin between the two Flume Agents on the HDFS
>> >> tier.
>> >>
>> >> Both of those values seem quite high to me (batch size and number of
>> >> sinks).
>> >>
>> >> Am I missing something as far as tuning?
>> >> Which would allow for greater increase to throughput, more Sinks or
>> >> larger
>> >> batch size?
>> >>
>> >> I'm stumped here.  I still think I can get this to work. :)
>> >>
>> >> Any suggestions are most welcome.
>> >> Thanks for your time.
>> >> Chris
>> >>
>
>
+
Chris Neal 2013-03-12, 21:40
+
Chris Neal 2013-03-12, 21:55
+
Roshan Naik 2013-03-12, 22:37