You can try to set "queue.buffering.max.messages" larger, for example:

confParam=["queue.buffering.max.messages=2000000",
"batch.num.messages=1000"]

And reference for you:
https://github.com/edenhill/librdkafka/issues/210

2015-10-27 1:19 GMT+08:00 Prabhjot Bharaj <prabhbha...@gmail.com>:

> Hi,
>
> This is a type of problem where you operating more than network capacity.
> This can be handled at two places (you decide whichever is useful/practical
> for use case)  :-
>
> 1. In case the bottleneck is because of the broker slowness, increase the
> number of partitions of your topic, balance them out to newer nodes (if
> required) and retry. Make sure your producer can write to the new
> partitions as well
> 2. In case this is because your producer is creating too many messages,
> there are 2 ways you can commit them (select the most appropriate according
> to your use case. I'm considering that you dont want to lose your
> messages):-
> ------>     a. increase the number of producer machines (i.e. balance your
> producer load among more machines)
> ------->    b. produce at a slower rate (in case your producers are not
> scalable, you are in a problem. you can solve this problem by sacrificing
> latency). Write to your queue in batches and wait for it to get cleared
> before you commit the next batch to your local queue.
>
> Regards,
> Prabcs
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Eduardo Costa Alfaia <
> e.costaalf...@unibs.it> wrote:
>
> > Hi Magnus
> > I think this answer
> > c) producing messages at a higher rate than the network or broker can
> > handle
> > How could I manager this?
> >
> >
> > > On 26 Oct 2015, at 17:45, Magnus Edenhill <mag...@edenhill.se> wrote:
> > >
> > > c) producing messages at a higher rate than the network or broker can
> > > handle
> >
> >
> > --
> > Informativa sulla Privacy: http://www.unibs.it/node/8155
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand
> binary, and those who don't"
>

Reply via email to