Mailing-List: contact users-help@nifi.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@nifi.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bc3b600734884450b6b4be0c268e9171@bowex17e.micron.com>
References: <bc3b600734884450b6b4be0c268e9171@bowex17e.micron.com>
From: Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2017 17:01:39 -0500
Message-ID: <CALJK9a4taG55FotGPvw3rSVPu-5rFksz-NbEfegcjTU90uRKpg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Visual Indicator for "Can't run because there are no threads"?
To: users@nifi.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
archived-at: Fri, 03 Mar 2017 22:01:44 -0000

Peter,

That is a good idea and I don't believe there is any existing JIRAs to
do so.  But the idea makes a lot of sense.  Being so thread starved
that processors do not get to run for extended periods of time is
pretty unique.  Makes me think that the flow has processors which are
not honoring the model but are rather more acting like greedy thread
daemons.  That should also be considered.  But even with that said I
could certainly see how it would be helpful to know that a processor
is running less often than it would like due to lack of available
threads rather than just backpressure.

Thanks
Joe

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Peter Wicks (pwicks) <pwicks@micron.com> wr=
ote:
> I think everyone was really happy when backpressure finally got super gre=
at
> indicators.  Backpressure used to be my #1, =E2=80=9CWhy isn=E2=80=99t st=
uff moving?=E2=80=9D
> problem.  My latest issue is there are no free threads, sometimes for hou=
rs,
> and I don=E2=80=99t notice and start wondering what=E2=80=99s going on.
>
>
>
> Is there anything under consideration for an indicator to show how many
> processors can=E2=80=99t run because there aren=E2=80=99t enough threads =
available? I can
> create a ticket, wasn=E2=80=99t sure if there was one floating around.