Hi Rico!
When you say that the program falls behind the unlimited generating source,
I assume you have some unbounded buffering channel (like Kafka) between the
generator and the Flink job. Is that correct? Flink itself backpressures to
the sources, but if the source is Kafka, this does of course not affect the
Kafka data producer.
In that case, you probably "underprovisioned" the streaming job for the
data rate. The new windowing should have much better throughput, but it may
not be high enough for the data rate, which means you probably need more
cores.
It may be worth checking other aspects of the program. Depending on what
types you use, serialization can be expensive (especially for types like
JSON).
Also, please make sure you start the system in streaming mode
("start-cluster-streaming.sh" rather than "start-cluster.sh") - that makes
a difference in memory behavior for streaming jobs.
Greetings,
Stephan
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi Rico,
> are you generating the data directly in your flink program or some
> external queue, such as Kafka?
>
> Cheers,
> Aljoscha
>
> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 at 13:47 Rico Bergmann <i...@ricobergmann.de> wrote:
>
>> And as side note:
>>
>> The problem with duplicates seems also to be solved!
>>
>> Cheers Rico.
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 24.09.2015 um 12:21 schrieb Rico Bergmann <i...@ricobergmann.de>:
>>
>> I took a first glance.
>>
>> I ran 2 test setups. One with a limited test data generator, the outputs
>> around 200 events per second. In this setting the new implementation keeps
>> up with the incoming message rate.
>>
>> The other setup had an unlimited generation (at highest possible rate).
>> There the same problem as before can be observed. After 2 minutes runtime
>> the output of my program is more than a minute behind ... And increasing
>> over time. But I don't know whether this could be a setup problem. I
>> noticed the os load of my testsystem was around 90%. So it might be more a
>> setup problem ...
>>
>> Thanks for your support so far.
>>
>> Cheers. Rico.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 24.09.2015 um 09:33 schrieb Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>:
>>
>> Hi Rico,
>> you should be able to get it with these steps:
>>
>> git clone https://github.com/StephanEwen/incubator-flink.git flink
>> cd flink
>> git checkout -t origin/windows
>>
>> This will get you on Stephan's windowing branch. Then you can do a
>>
>> mvn clean install -DskipTests
>>
>> to build it.
>>
>> I will merge his stuff later today, then you should also be able to use
>> it by running the 0.10-SNAPSHOT version.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Aljoscha
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 at 09:11 Rico Bergmann <i...@ricobergmann.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> Sounds great. How can I get the source code before it's merged to the
>>> master branch? Unfortunately I only have 2 days left for trying this out ...
>>>
>>> Greets. Rico.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 24.09.2015 um 00:57 schrieb Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>> Hi Rico!
>>>
>>> We have finished the first part of the Window API reworks. You can find
>>> the code here: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1175
>>>
>>> It should fix the issues and offer vastly improved performance (up to
>>> 50x faster). For now, it supports time windows, but we will support the
>>> other cases in the next days.
>>>
>>> I'll ping you once it is merged, I'd be curious if it fixes your issue.
>>> Sorry that you ran into this problem...
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>> Stephan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Rico Bergmann <i...@ricobergmann.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> While working with grouping and windowing I encountered a strange
>>>> behavior. I'm doing:
>>>>
>>>> dataStream.groupBy(KeySelector).window(Time.of(x,
>>>> TimeUnit.SECONDS)).mapWindow(toString).flatten()
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> When I run the program containing this snippet it initially outputs
>>>> data at a rate around 150 events per sec. (That is roughly the input rate
>>>> for the program). After about 10-30 minutes the rate drops down below 5
>>>> events per sec. This leads to event delivery offsets getting bigger and
>>>> bigger ...
>>>>
>>>> Any explanation for this? I know you are reworking the streaming API.
>>>> But it would be useful to know, why this happens ...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers. Rico.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
