> I think that we can change this default but we should provide an official API to share the threadpools between the clients.
That sounds good to me. Since it will introduce a new API to the client side. I will create a new proposal for the API changes. Thanks, Penghui On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 8:21 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am sorry, I am late on this train. > > Unfortunately if you have to connect using different authentication > parameters you need to open many PulsarClients. > > I think that we can change this default but we should provide an official > API to share the threadpools between the clients. > > There is no need to explicitly espose all the threadpools, that is > difficult for users to deal with. > We should have an API to allow sharing resources among multiple clients. > > Interface PulsarClientGroup .... > > > PulsarClient client = ....newClient(). > .withGroup(pulsarClientGroup) > .... > > > > Enrico > > Il Lun 26 Dic 2022, 12:44 Ran Gao <r...@apache.org> ha scritto: > > > It seems this change will not affect the consumer, because the default > > executor is a single-thread executor service, increasing the listener > > threads number will allocate different single-thread executor services to > > different consumers. > > > > On 2022/12/21 09:01:39 Yunze Xu wrote: > > > I have a concern about the message ordering. If we have more than 1 > > > listener thread by default, could messages from the same topic be > > > passed to different listener threads? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yunze > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:12 AM 丛搏 <bog...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > Our default configuration is best for most users. Multiple clients > are > > > > a few cases. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bo > > > > > > > > houxiaoyu <anonhx...@gmail.com> 于2022年12月20日周二 16:02写道： > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > This change might bring thread number increment in case users > create > > many > > > > > clients, but too many pulsar clients run in one machine is not a > > good use > > > > > case I think, so this change looks good to me. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Xiaoyu Hou > > > > > > > > > > <mattisonc...@gmail.com> 于2022年12月20日周二 12:25写道： > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > My concern is whether this change will affect some users who are > > creating > > > > > > many clients. I think we can wait for other users to confirm it. > > (If this > > > > > > will be affected, maybe we can give it a max_io_thread_num and > > then expand > > > > > > the size from 1 to max_io_thread_num when adding a new consumer > or > > producer) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Mattison > > > > > > On Dec 20, 2022, 11:17 +0800, PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org>, > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I noticed the Java Client (I haven't checked other clients) > uses > > 1 IO > > > > > > > thread and 1 listener > > > > > > > thread by default. It will require users to update the thread > > > > > > configuration > > > > > > > if they have > > > > > > > multiple cores and desired high throughput. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is the example that we change to 16 IO threads in > > > > > > > openmessaging benchmark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/openmessaging/benchmark/blob/master/driver-pulsar/pulsar.yaml#L22 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can apply the configuration of the threads based on the CPU > > cores. So > > > > > > > that for the > > > > > > > most common cases, users don't need to touch the thread > > configuration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > private int numIoThreads = > > Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors(); > > > > > > > private int numListenerThreads = > > > > > > Runtime.getRuntime().availableProcessors(); > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Penghui > > > > > > > > > > > >
