flume-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Guarantees of the memory channel for delivering to sink
Date Tue, 06 Nov 2012 21:38:06 GMT
Your still going to be writing out all events, no? So how would file
channel do more IO than that?

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Rahul Ravindran <rahulrv@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>    I am very new to Flume and we are hoping to use it for our log
> aggregation into HDFS. I have a few questions below:
>
> FileChannel will double our disk IO, which will affect IO performance on
> certain performance sensitive machines. Hence, I was hoping to write a
> custom Flume source which will use a memory channel, and which will perform
> checkpointing. The checkpoint will be updated each time we perform a
> successive insertion into the memory channel. (I realize that this results
> in a risk of data, the maximum size of which is the capacity of the memory
> channel).
>
>    As long as there is capacity in the memory channel buffers, does the
> memory channel guarantee delivery to a sink (does it wait for
> acknowledgements, and retry failed packets)? This would mean that we need to
> ensure that we do not exceed the channel capacity.
>
> I am writing a custom source which will use the memory channel, and which
> will catch a ChannelException to identify any channel capacity issues(so,
> buffer used in the memory channel is full because of lagging sinks/network
> issues etc). Is that a reasonable assumption to make?
>
> Thanks,
> ~Rahul.



-- 
Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/

Mime
View raw message