You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@activemq.apache.org by "José Micó (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2012/05/21 01:15:40 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (APLO-206) Load balance of job queues
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APLO-206?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
José Micó updated APLO-206:
---------------------------
Description:
I wish to have load balanced job queues, like in ActiveMQ (copied and pasted):
"A queue implements load balancer semantics. A single message will be received by exactly one consumer. If there are no consumers available at the time the message is sent it will be kept until a consumer is available that can process the message. If a consumer receives a message and does not acknowledge it before closing then the message will be redelivered to another consumer. A queue can have many consumers with messages load balanced across the available consumers."
For example, suppose that I send tree jobs (j1, j2, j3) to a queue with 2 consumers (c1,c2).
The first job takes 10 seconds to complete, jobs 2 and 3 takes only 1 second.
Consumers are using 'client' ack, with credit:1,0 in order to receive only one job at the time.
The desired behaviour of consumers is:
[ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
[ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Got job 3
[ 21:30:02 ][ c2 ] Ack job 3, now idle
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
But currently, Apollo does:
[ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
[ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle (!) c2 is idle but does not gets job 3
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Got job 3
[ 21:30:11 ][ c1 ] Ack job 3, now idle
Seems that jobs are assigned in a round-robin fashion at the moment of being received by the broker.
If in this example I send 9 jobs of 1 second (instead of 2), consumer #1 gets 5 and consumer #2 gets the remaining 5, when the optimum would be to send the 9 fast jobs to consumer #2 while consumer #1 is processing the slow one. I know that using 'client' ack with credit:1,0 is suboptimal from broker perspective, but is the optimal way to balance jobs between workers.
Besides the underutilization of resources, the main problem is that if a consumer takes too much time to process a job (say, due to a DB lock) it may block the processing of a bunch of jobs already assigned to it.
...
BTW, impressive piece of work!!! I really impressed by the completeness of features, and how well Apollo behaved when I overloaded it with stress tests :)
was:
I wish to have load balanced job queues, like in ActiveMQ (copied and pasted):
"A queue implements load balancer semantics. A single message will be received by exactly one consumer. If there are no consumers available at the time the message is sent it will be kept until a consumer is available that can process the message. If a consumer receives a message and does not acknowledge it before closing then the message will be redelivered to another consumer. A queue can have many consumers with messages load balanced across the available consumers."
For example, suppose that I send tree jobs (j1, j2, j3) to a queue with 2 consumers (c1,c2).
The first job takes 10 seconds to complete, jobs 2 and 3 takes only 1 second.
Consumers are using 'client' ack, with credit:1,0 in order to receive only one job at the time.
The desired behaviour of consumers is:
[ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
[ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Got job 3
[ 21:30:02 ][ c2 ] Ack job 3, now idle
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
But currently, Apollo does:
[ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
[ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
[ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle (!) c2 is idle but does not gets job 3
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
[ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Got job 3
[ 21:30:14 ][ c1 ] Ack job 3, now idle
Seems that jobs are assigned in a round-robin fashion at the moment of being received by the broker.
If in this example I send 9 jobs of 1 second (instead of 2), consumer #1 gets 5 and consumer #2 gets the remaining 5, when the optimum would be to send the 9 fast jobs to consumer #2 while consumer #1 is processing the slow one. I know that using 'client' ack with credit:1,0 is suboptimal from broker perspective, but is the optimal way to balance jobs between workers.
Besides the underutilization of resources, the main problem is that if a consumer takes too much time to process a job (say, due to a DB lock) it may block the processing of a bunch of jobs already assigned to it.
...
BTW, impressive piece of work!!! I really impressed by the completeness of features, and how well Apollo behaved when I overloaded it with stress tests :)
> Load balance of job queues
> --------------------------
>
> Key: APLO-206
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/APLO-206
> Project: ActiveMQ Apollo
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: José Micó
>
> I wish to have load balanced job queues, like in ActiveMQ (copied and pasted):
> "A queue implements load balancer semantics. A single message will be received by exactly one consumer. If there are no consumers available at the time the message is sent it will be kept until a consumer is available that can process the message. If a consumer receives a message and does not acknowledge it before closing then the message will be redelivered to another consumer. A queue can have many consumers with messages load balanced across the available consumers."
> For example, suppose that I send tree jobs (j1, j2, j3) to a queue with 2 consumers (c1,c2).
> The first job takes 10 seconds to complete, jobs 2 and 3 takes only 1 second.
> Consumers are using 'client' ack, with credit:1,0 in order to receive only one job at the time.
> The desired behaviour of consumers is:
> [ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
> [ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
> [ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle
> [ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Got job 3
> [ 21:30:02 ][ c2 ] Ack job 3, now idle
> [ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
> But currently, Apollo does:
> [ 21:30:00 ][ c1 ] Got job 1
> [ 21:30:00 ][ c2 ] Got job 2
> [ 21:30:01 ][ c2 ] Ack job 2, now idle (!) c2 is idle but does not gets job 3
> [ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Ack job 1, now idle
> [ 21:30:10 ][ c1 ] Got job 3
> [ 21:30:11 ][ c1 ] Ack job 3, now idle
> Seems that jobs are assigned in a round-robin fashion at the moment of being received by the broker.
> If in this example I send 9 jobs of 1 second (instead of 2), consumer #1 gets 5 and consumer #2 gets the remaining 5, when the optimum would be to send the 9 fast jobs to consumer #2 while consumer #1 is processing the slow one. I know that using 'client' ack with credit:1,0 is suboptimal from broker perspective, but is the optimal way to balance jobs between workers.
> Besides the underutilization of resources, the main problem is that if a consumer takes too much time to process a job (say, due to a DB lock) it may block the processing of a bunch of jobs already assigned to it.
> ...
> BTW, impressive piece of work!!! I really impressed by the completeness of features, and how well Apollo behaved when I overloaded it with stress tests :)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira