Thanks for the input Aljoscha and Ufuk! I will try out the #2 approach and
report back.
Thanks,
Zach
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 7:26 AM Ufuk Celebi wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Aljoscha Krettek
> wrote:
> > IMHO the only change for 2) is that you possibly get better machine
> utili
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
> IMHO the only change for 2) is that you possibly get better machine
> utilization because it will use more parallel threads. So I think it’s a
> valid approach.
>
> @Ufuk, could there be problems with the number of network buffers? I t
IMHO the only change for 2) is that you possibly get better machine utilization
because it will use more parallel threads. So I think it’s a valid approach.
@Ufuk, could there be problems with the number of network buffers? I think not,
because the connections are multiplexed in one channel, is
What would the differences be between these scenarios?
1) one task manager with numberOfTaskSlots=1 and one job with parallelism=1
2) one task manager with numberOfTaskSlots=10 and one job with
parallelism=10
In both cases all of the job's tasks get executed within the one task
manager's jvm. Ar
