You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@beam.apache.org by "Tim Robertson (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2018/03/16 09:40:00 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (BEAM-3862) SolrIO: Expose commitWithin to the
Solr write
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3862?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Tim Robertson updated BEAM-3862:
--------------------------------
Description:
A good improvement for to SolrIO would be to allow the caller to provide a {{commitWithin}} parameter. Currently the batch is passed to the underlying {{solrClient}} which results in defaulting to the configured server behavior.
The justification for exposing this is that the collection in the target SOLR server might be configured in a way that is not suitable for this beam job. E.g. a server tuned to accept real time updates with fast flush times from streaming Beam job 1, while Beam job 2 is doing an nightly bulk load.
This is related to (BEAM-3849, BEAM-3848, BEAM-3820) and should be considered together. I understand that the policy of Beam is not to expose parameters for tuning. When it comes to the IOs which are for interfacing with external systems I recommend this policy be reconsidered. The IO modules typically wrap clients to target systems ({{CloudSolrClient}} in this case) which all have tunable parameters for good reason. My recommendation would be to keep {{SolrIO.write()}} providing sensible defaults but expose an additional builder e.g. {{SolrIO.writeBuilder().withCommitWithinMs(300000).withBatchSize(9000).build()}} .
Please feel free to assign to me if of interest and I'll provide a PR.
was:
A good improvement for to SolrIO would be to allow the caller to provide a `commitWithin` parameter. Currently the batch is passed to the underlying `solrClient` which results in defaulting to the configured server behavior.
The justification for exposing this is that the collection in the target SOLR server might be configured in a way that is not suitable for this beam job. E.g. a server tuned to accept real time updates with fast flush times from streaming Beam job 1, while Beam job 2 is doing an nightly bulk load.
This is related to (BEAM-3849, BEAM-3848, BEAM-3820) and should be considered together. I understand that the policy of Beam is not to expose parameters for tuning. When it comes to the IOs which are for interfacing with external systems I recommend this policy be reconsidered. The IO modules typically wrap clients to target systems (`CloudSolrClient` in this case) which all have tunable parameters for good reason. My recommendation would be to keep `SolrIO.write()` providing sensible defaults but expose an additional builder e.g.`SolrIO.writeBuilder().withCommitWithinMs(300000).withBatchSize(9000).build()`.
Please feel free to assign to me if of interest and I'll provide a PR.
> SolrIO: Expose commitWithin to the Solr write
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-3862
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3862
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: io-java-solr
> Affects Versions: 2.2.0, 2.3.0
> Reporter: Tim Robertson
> Assignee: Ismaël Mejía
> Priority: Trivial
>
> A good improvement for to SolrIO would be to allow the caller to provide a {{commitWithin}} parameter. Currently the batch is passed to the underlying {{solrClient}} which results in defaulting to the configured server behavior.
> The justification for exposing this is that the collection in the target SOLR server might be configured in a way that is not suitable for this beam job. E.g. a server tuned to accept real time updates with fast flush times from streaming Beam job 1, while Beam job 2 is doing an nightly bulk load.
> This is related to (BEAM-3849, BEAM-3848, BEAM-3820) and should be considered together. I understand that the policy of Beam is not to expose parameters for tuning. When it comes to the IOs which are for interfacing with external systems I recommend this policy be reconsidered. The IO modules typically wrap clients to target systems ({{CloudSolrClient}} in this case) which all have tunable parameters for good reason. My recommendation would be to keep {{SolrIO.write()}} providing sensible defaults but expose an additional builder e.g. {{SolrIO.writeBuilder().withCommitWithinMs(300000).withBatchSize(9000).build()}} .
> Please feel free to assign to me if of interest and I'll provide a PR.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)