Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Vortex performance improvement: Enable multiple stream clients per worker #17550
Vortex performance improvement: Enable multiple stream clients per worker #17550
Changes from 2 commits
a47e7ee
a9d9207
615373c
8957d66
bf41d95
e35bdc2
aa03e4a
569ea58
50664b5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changing transform names can affect update compatibility - do you need this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No I don't, but this does not follow the same convention other apply labels use (no spaces on names). Should I revert?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what did you find about the cost of synchronization?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
create a new option that defaults to 1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of generating all clients eagerly, let's do it lazily. Initialize a List with count copies of Optional.empty(). Then do
this.streamAppendCient = APPEND_CLIENTS.get(streamName, this.generateClients).get(clientNumber).get().orElseGet(this.getStreamAppendClient).
FYI you could also do this with null if you don't care to use Optional here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of making the client creation lazy, I reverted the cache structure back to have a single client per entry. But now, the cache key is the stream name + the assigned client number.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This isn't quite right - we're now invalidating all of the StreamWriters when any one of them fails. I think instead you want to just null out the one that failed and allow it to be recreated the next get.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The invalidation here corresponds to a schema mismatch, shouldn't all the clients be invalidated for a particular stream?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
made the changes to only invalidate the writer in use by the bundle, not all of them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
why not private int?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done