Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[STORM-3365] Configuration to disable Topology Lag Monitoring #2984

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 3, 2019

Conversation

kishorvpatil
Copy link
Contributor

Sometimes Kafka broker is unreachable/security can cause issue..making UI hang for too long. So adding feature to allow disabling Topology Lag monitoring.

@@ -316,6 +316,12 @@
@isBoolean
public static final String UI_DISABLE_HTTP_BINDING = "ui.disable.http.binding";

/**
* This controls wheather Storm UI would not monitor Spout lag.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

spelling of whether.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed.

Copy link
Contributor

@srdo srdo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1, few minor comments

@@ -316,6 +316,12 @@
@isBoolean
public static final String UI_DISABLE_HTTP_BINDING = "ui.disable.http.binding";

/**
* This controls whether Storm UI would not monitor Spout lag.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: If I didn't already know about storm-kafka-monitor, this would be unclear to me. I would also be confused why this doesn't do anything for non-Kafka spouts. How about "This controls whether Storm UI displays spout lag for the Kafka spout"

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Addressed.

@@ -1618,7 +1619,8 @@ private static Double nullToZero(Double value) {
* @return getTopologyLag.
*/
public static Map<String, Map<String, Object>> getTopologyLag(StormTopology userTopology, Map<String,Object> config) {
return TopologySpoutLag.lag(userTopology, config);
Boolean disableLagMonitoring = ObjectReader.getBoolean(config.get(DaemonConfig.UI_DISABLE_SPOUT_LAG_MONITORING), false);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: Consider adding the default to defaults.yaml instead of here. That way it's obvious to users what the default is.

Copy link
Contributor

@HeartSaVioR HeartSaVioR left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

Btw, my 2 cents, I feel the ideal direction is addressing STORM-3202. Kafka source metrics are already reporting these offsets to Nimbus, so once we integrate it to REST API we may get rid of topology lag monitor tool.

@srdo
Copy link
Contributor

srdo commented Mar 30, 2019

Agree with Jungtaek, getting rid of storm-kafka-monitor would be great.

@kishorvpatil
Copy link
Contributor Author

@HeartSaVioR I totally agree that we should use spout metrics published to nimbus and make it generalized UI display and REST API response. At that point we can get rid of storm-kafka-monitor component.

@@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ ui.header.buffer.bytes: 4096
ui.http.creds.plugin: org.apache.storm.security.auth.DefaultHttpCredentialsPlugin
ui.pagination: 20
ui.disable.http.binding: true
ui.disable.spout.lag.monitoring: true
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be false?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@srdo I would rather turn off the feature by default. I can make it false if you think otherwise.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, it's fine by me. I just wanted to be sure it wasn't a mistake.

@kishorvpatil kishorvpatil merged commit 9680928 into apache:master Apr 3, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants