Hi Yan,
I've uploaded a file with TRACE level logging here:
http://filebin.ca/261yhsTZcZQZ/samza-container-0.log.gz
I really appreciate your help as this is a critical issue for me.
Thanks,
Roger
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Yan Fang wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> " but it only spawns one conta
I think I see what's happening.
When there are 8 tasks and I set yarn.container.count=8, then each
container is responsible for a single task. However, the
systemStreamLagCounts map (
https://github.com/apache/samza/blob/0.9.0/samza-core/src/main/scala/org/apache/samza/system/chooser/Bootstrappin
Hi all,
Do you think we could get this bootstrapping bug fixed before 0.9.1
release? It seems like a critical bug.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-720
Thanks,
Roger
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Yan Fang wrote:
> Agree. I will test it this weekend.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Fang, Yan
Was looking through the code a little and it looks like the
BootstrappingChooser could use the list of SSPs passed into it's register()
method to figure out which partitions it need to monitor.
I wanted to try to build Samza to play around with it but I'm getting error
trying to build off of both
Hi Roger,
I will try to look at the issue tomorrow if my time allows.
First thing first:
The build has some unexpected results. A quick fix:
1. apply https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-712
2. add
sourceSets.main.scala.srcDir "src/main/java" sourceSets.main.java.srcDirs =
[]
at line 1
Thanks, Yan. I'll give it a try.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 21, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Yan Fang wrote:
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> I will try to look at the issue tomorrow if my time allows.
>
> First thing first:
>
> The build has some unexpected results. A quick fix:
>
> 1. apply https://issues.apac
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/34974/
---
(Updated June 22, 2015, 6:07 a.m.)
Review request for samza.
Changes
---
> On June 18, 2015, 10:37 p.m., Navina Ramesh wrote:
> > Mostly looks good. Have some questions:
> > * Have you tried the message "filtering" logic to the container level
> > instead of the task level ? Not sure which is simpler in terms of code
> > change. Since the container has access to all
