You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@storm.apache.org by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> on 2016/03/20 23:59:24 UTC
Storm cluster specifications
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should
I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>> wrote:
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>> wrote:
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for answer and help
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
> Again, it depends on your topology how long it would take for the latency
> numbers to stabilize. I cannot answer that for you.
> In general, the "complete latency" is a pretty good proxy for the behavior
> of the topology. If it's lower that's probably better.
>
> The capacity might be *related* to the CPU utilization (but not
> necessarily, again, there are too many factors). If you want to measure
> CPU utilization, you should actually measure the CPU utilization on the
> hosts directly instead of trying to infer it from metrics like capacity.
> Answering the Q of "how do I measure CPU utilization" is probably outside
> of the scope of this list. That's a very general sysadmin / dev-ops type
> of question, to which there is no single solution.
>
> - Erik
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:17 PM, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Thanks to you I got it . but what should I do when I need to compare
>> between two topologies
>>
>> I read about tools like ganglia that gave graph about CPU utilization
>> should I use it to make measuring performance easier than numbers
>>
>> And is there specific columns in storm ui that should be greater than
>> other or less than other ?
>>
>> Last question i read that I can measure CPU utilization by capacity
>> column in storm ui
>> But don't know what are numbers should I get . is there specific number
>> that I can compare with it ?
>>
>> Sorry for my lot questions . I made search to get answers for those
>> questions but couldn't get it well
>>
>> Thanks for your time
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <eweathers@groupon.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','eweathers@groupon.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by "it". The latency numbers might *never*
>>> stabilize depending on how your topology is written and the data it is
>>> processing.
>>> As I said, this is highly dependent on a bunch of stuff. The latency
>>> numbers might stabilize within minutes if the topology is trivial. Or it
>>> might take hours (e.g., if your topology is doing a lot of work that is
>>> dependent on having data pre-cached). Or it might never stabilize if the
>>> data flow and content is highly variable.
>>>
>>> - Erik
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:49 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks but how can I decide it . or what are the conditions that make
>>>> me know it ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Erik
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency .
>>>>>> when I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page
>>>>>> of storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”,
>>>>>>> what do you mean by that?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted
>>>>>>> topology numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so
>>>>>>> how can I get numbers rightly ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking
>>>>>>>> about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>>>>>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm +
>>>>>>>>> zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention
>>>>>>>>> (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>>>>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>>>>>>> in reverse .
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster
>>>>>>>>>> itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the
>>>>>>>>>> Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which
>>>>>>>>>>> one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com>.
Again, it depends on your topology how long it would take for the latency
numbers to stabilize. I cannot answer that for you.
In general, the "complete latency" is a pretty good proxy for the behavior
of the topology. If it's lower that's probably better.
The capacity might be *related* to the CPU utilization (but not
necessarily, again, there are too many factors). If you want to measure
CPU utilization, you should actually measure the CPU utilization on the
hosts directly instead of trying to infer it from metrics like capacity.
Answering the Q of "how do I measure CPU utilization" is probably outside
of the scope of this list. That's a very general sysadmin / dev-ops type
of question, to which there is no single solution.
- Erik
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:17 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks to you I got it . but what should I do when I need to compare
> between two topologies
>
> I read about tools like ganglia that gave graph about CPU utilization
> should I use it to make measuring performance easier than numbers
>
> And is there specific columns in storm ui that should be greater than
> other or less than other ?
>
> Last question i read that I can measure CPU utilization by capacity column
> in storm ui
> But don't know what are numbers should I get . is there specific number
> that I can compare with it ?
>
> Sorry for my lot questions . I made search to get answers for those
> questions but couldn't get it well
>
> Thanks for your time
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
>
>> Not sure what you mean by "it". The latency numbers might *never*
>> stabilize depending on how your topology is written and the data it is
>> processing.
>> As I said, this is highly dependent on a bunch of stuff. The latency
>> numbers might stabilize within minutes if the topology is trivial. Or it
>> might take hours (e.g., if your topology is doing a lot of work that is
>> dependent on having data pre-cached). Or it might never stabilize if the
>> data flow and content is highly variable.
>>
>> - Erik
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:49 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks but how can I decide it . or what are the conditions that make
>>> me know it ?
>>>
>>>
>>> In Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
>>>>
>>>> - Erik
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency .
>>>>> when I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page
>>>>> of storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>>>>>
>>>>> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”,
>>>>>> what do you mean by that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted
>>>>>> topology numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so
>>>>>> how can I get numbers rightly ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking
>>>>>>> about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>>>>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm +
>>>>>>>> zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention
>>>>>>>> (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>>>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>>>>>> in reverse .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster
>>>>>>>>> itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the
>>>>>>>>> Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which
>>>>>>>>>> one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks to you I got it . but what should I do when I need to compare
between two topologies
I read about tools like ganglia that gave graph about CPU utilization
should I use it to make measuring performance easier than numbers
And is there specific columns in storm ui that should be greater than other
or less than other ?
Last question i read that I can measure CPU utilization by capacity column
in storm ui
But don't know what are numbers should I get . is there specific number
that I can compare with it ?
Sorry for my lot questions . I made search to get answers for those
questions but couldn't get it well
Thanks for your time
On Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by "it". The latency numbers might *never*
> stabilize depending on how your topology is written and the data it is
> processing.
> As I said, this is highly dependent on a bunch of stuff. The latency
> numbers might stabilize within minutes if the topology is trivial. Or it
> might take hours (e.g., if your topology is doing a lot of work that is
> dependent on having data pre-cached). Or it might never stabilize if the
> data flow and content is highly variable.
>
> - Erik
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:49 PM, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Thanks but how can I decide it . or what are the conditions that make me
>> know it ?
>>
>>
>> In Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <eweathers@groupon.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','eweathers@groupon.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
>>>
>>> - Erik
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency .
>>>> when I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page
>>>> of storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>>>>
>>>> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>
>>>>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”,
>>>>> what do you mean by that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Justin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
>>>>> numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
>>>>> get numbers rightly ?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking
>>>>>> about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>>>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo
>>>>>>> on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>>>>>>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>>>>> in reverse .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster
>>>>>>>> itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the
>>>>>>>> Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which
>>>>>>>>> one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com>.
Not sure what you mean by "it". The latency numbers might *never*
stabilize depending on how your topology is written and the data it is
processing.
As I said, this is highly dependent on a bunch of stuff. The latency
numbers might stabilize within minutes if the topology is trivial. Or it
might take hours (e.g., if your topology is doing a lot of work that is
dependent on having data pre-cached). Or it might never stabilize if the
data flow and content is highly variable.
- Erik
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:49 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks but how can I decide it . or what are the conditions that make me
> know it ?
>
>
> In Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
>
>> That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
>>
>> - Erik
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency .
>>> when I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page
>>> of storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>>>
>>> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sam,
>>>>
>>>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”,
>>>> what do you mean by that?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
>>>> numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
>>>> get numbers rightly ?
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Right.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking
>>>>> about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo
>>>>>> on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>>>>>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>>>> in reverse .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself
>>>>>>> - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on
>>>>>>> the high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which
>>>>>>>> one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks but how can I decide it . or what are the conditions that make me
know it ?
In Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com> wrote:
> That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
>
> - Erik
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency . when
>> I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page of
>> storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>>
>> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sam,
>>>
>>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”,
>>> what do you mean by that?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
>>> numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
>>> get numbers rightly ?
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Right.
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about
>>>> that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo
>>>>> on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>>>>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Justin
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>>> in reverse .
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself
>>>>>> - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on
>>>>>> the high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Justin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>>>>>>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Erik Weathers <ew...@groupon.com>.
That *entirely* depends on your topology and environment.
- Erik
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:27 PM, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency . when
> I submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page of
> storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
>
> Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>
>> Sam,
>>
>> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”, what
>> do you mean by that?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
>> numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
>> get numbers rightly ?
>>
>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Right.
>>>
>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about
>>> that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>>> performance for topology right ?
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on
>>>> core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>>>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>>> in reverse .
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sam,
>>>>>
>>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself -
>>>>> not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the
>>>>> high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>>
>>>>> Justin
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>>>>>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
I mean numbers which I got in complete latency and execute latency . when I
submitted topology those numbers changed every time I refreshed page of
storm ui . when it becomes stable to measure performance of topology
Tuesday, March 22, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
> Sam,
>
> Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”, what
> do you mean by that?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Justin
>
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
> Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
> numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
> get numbers rightly ?
>
> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Right.
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about
>> that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
>> performance for topology right ?
>>
>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on
>>> core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>>> in reverse .
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sam,
>>>>
>>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself -
>>>> not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the
>>>> high-performant system (core i5).
>>>>
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is there any help ?
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>>>>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
Sam,
Which numbers are you speaking of? And by “get the numbers rightly”, what do you mean by that?
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:30, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I get numbers rightly ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>> wrote:
Right.
On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high performance for topology right ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks again. Last question about storm ui . when I submitted topology
numbers that appeared changed every time I refreshed page . so how can I
get numbers rightly ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
> Right.
>
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
> Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about
> that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
> performance for topology right ?
>
> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on
>> core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
>> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Justin
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
>> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
>> in reverse .
>>
>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sam,
>>>
>>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself -
>>> not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the
>>> high-performant system (core i5).
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is there any help ?
>>>
>>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>>>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>>> supervisor ?
>>>>
>>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>>
>>>> Appreciate your help
>>>> Thanks in advance
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
Right.
On Mar 21, 2016, at 14:16, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high performance for topology right ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>> wrote:
I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Really thanks for your reply . I will try it now . but I'm asking about
that if I run supervisor with high core then it will give me high
performance for topology right ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
> I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on
> core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease
> performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Justin
>
>
>
> On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
> Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine
> core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it
> in reverse .
>
> On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <justin.hopper@dev9.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','justin.hopper@dev9.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Sam,
>>
>> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself -
>> not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the
>> high-performant system (core i5).
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is there any help ?
>>
>> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>>> supervisor ?
>>>
>>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>>
>>> Appreciate your help
>>> Thanks in advance
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
I am recommending that you that try that approach first (storm + zoo on core2 duo; super on i5). I would expect more thread contention (decrease performance) if you choose to reverse the deployment strategy.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mar 21, 2016, at 11:18, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>> wrote:
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for replying . so I should run nimbus ,zookeeper on machine core2duo
and supervisor on core I 5 but Are results will change if I run it in
reverse .
On Monday, March 21, 2016, Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com> wrote:
> Sam,
>
> Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not
> performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the
> high-performant system (core i5).
>
> Justin
>
> On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
> Is there any help ?
>
> On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sammohel5@gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sammohel5@gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
>> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
>> supervisor ?
>>
>> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>>
>> Appreciate your help
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by Justin Hopper <ju...@dev9.com>.
Sam,
Nimbus and Zookeeper mostly perform management of the cluster itself - not performing real work. Given your situation, place the Supervisor on the high-performant system (core i5).
Justin
On Mar 20, 2016, at 23:15, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run supervisor ?
Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
Appreciate your help
Thanks in advance
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
> supervisor ?
>
> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>
> Appreciate your help
> Thanks in advance
>
Re: Storm cluster specifications
Posted by sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com>.
Is there any help ?
On Monday, March 21, 2016, sam mohel <sa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have 2 machine one has core 2duo and other has core i5 . which one
> should I run nimbus and zookeeper on it and which one should I run
> supervisor ?
>
> Should worker run on machine with high core or it shouldn't ?
>
> Appreciate your help
> Thanks in advance
>