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
-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.
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.
> 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]>
>> > 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