Papers › When Two Choices Are not Enough: Balancing at Scale in Distributed Stream Processing
When Two Choices Are not Enough: Balancing at Scale in Distributed Stream Processing
Muhammad Anis Uddin Nasir, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales, Nicolas Kourtellis, Marco Serafini
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Carefully balancing load in distributed stream processing systems has a fundamental impact on execution latency and throughput. Load balancing is challenging because real-world workloads are skewed: some tuples in the stream are associated to keys which are significantly more frequent than others. Skew is remarkably more problematic in large deployments: more workers implies fewer keys per worker, so it becomes harder to "average out" the cost of hot keys with cold keys. We propose a novel load balancing technique that uses a heaving hitter algorithm to efficiently identify the hottest keys in the stream. These hot keys are assigned to d ≥2 choices to ensure a balanced load, where d is tuned automatically to minimize the memory and computation cost of operator replication. The technique works online and does not require the use of routing tables. Our extensive evaluation shows that our technique can balance real-world workloads on large deployments, and improve throughput and latency by 150% and 60% respectively over the previous state-of-the-art when deployed on Apache Storm.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections