I have data coming into Kinesis streams from different producers. The data needs to be transformed into several different tables depending the the they type of that data. I'm trying to have a Lambda read from Kinesis Streams, transform the data into the different tables and then use Kinesis Firehose to batch and COPY into Redshift.
However since Firehose can only deliver to one Redhsift table at a time, I need to have multiple Firehose instances running equal to the number of tables I will have in my Redshift schema. I see that there is a default cap of 20 Firehose instances per region and I'm wondering if this is an ideal data pipeline for what I am trying to achieve.
I have designed almost similar data pipeline like yours. I get the data from the kinesis, transform the data after it has reached redshift. All the data from 1 stream goes to a one master table in redshift.Then, I run a cron job, which transforms the data into different tables.
If I’ve made a bad assumption please comment and I’ll refocus my answer.
Related
I am working on an application that will read and analyze the logs of payment transactions. I know I will use Kinesis Analytics as per my requirements, which takes the input from the Data Streams and Firehose. But I am having trouble deciding which input method should I use for my system. My requirements are:
It can tolerate latency, but Data shouldn't lose data.
Must record all the errors in DynamoDB or S3 buckets.
Which input stream is suitable for my use case?
Data Streams vs Firehose
Streams:
Kinesis data streams is highly customizable and best suited for developers building custom applications or streaming data for specialized needs.
Going to write custom code
Real time (200ms latency for classic, 70ms latency for enhanced fan-out)
You must manage scaling (shard splitting/merging)
Data storage for 1 to 7 days, replay capability, multi consumers
Use with Lambda to insert data in real-time to ElasticSearch
Firehose:
Firehose handles loading data streams directly into AWS products for processing.
Fully managed, send to S3, Splunk, Redshift, ElasticSearch
Serverless data transformations with Lambda
Near real time (lowest buffer time is 1 minute)
Automated Scaling
No data storage
Kinesis Data Streams allows consumers to READ streaming data. And it gives you a plenty of options to do so. It is best suitable for use cases that require custom processing, choice of stream processing frameworks, and sub-second processing latency.
Data is reliably stored in streams up to 7 days and distributed across 3 Availability Zones.
Kinesis Firehose is used to LOAD streaming data to a target destination (S3, Elasticsearch, Splunk, etc). You can also transform streaming data (by using Lambda) before loading it to destination.
Data from failed attempts will be saved to S3.
So, if your goal is to only load data to Kinesis Data Analytics service with minimal or no pre-processing then try Kinesis Firehose first.
Please note, that you also would need to consider such aspects as cost, development efforts, scaling options, volume of the data when choosing a proper service.
Please take a look at the following AWS Solutions Implementation for reference:
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/implementations/real-time-web-analytics-with-kinesis/
https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/implementations/real-time-iot-device-monitoring-with-kinesis/
There are some key differences between Kinesis Stream (KS) and Firehose (FH):
KS is real time, while FH is near-real time.
KS requires manual scaling and setup of its provisioning (shards) , while FH is basically serverless.
KS records are immutable (they persist in stream for its retention period - default 24h), while records in FH are gone from FH the moment they are delivered to destination.
From what you wrote, I think FH should be considered first, as you are not concerned about non-real-time nature of FH, it is much easier to manage and setup, and you can specify S3 as a backup for failed or all messages:
Kinesis Data Firehose uses Amazon S3 to backup all or failed only data that it attempts to deliver to your chosen destination.
The S3 backup ensures you are not loosing records, if delivery or lambda processing fail. Subsequently, in my view, Firehose addresses your two points well.
You can use firehose to feed into analytics, but question is how firehose gets data? You can write your own code to feed data or use kinesis data steams. Firehose mainly is delivery system for stream data that can be written in to various destinations such as S3, Redshift or others with optional capability to perform data transformation.
Check this link https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/abd217from-batch-to-streaming?from_action=save and see how your use case can benefit from the information.
More info: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/kinesisanalytics/latest/dev/how-it-works.html
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/dev/what-is-this-service.html
If you are creating s3 files from the kinesis stream but you dont require cleaning of those s3 files then go with the firehose option. Also if you dont have any partitioning key requirement that makes many small s3 files then firehose is a good solution. If you are doing more cleaning up the FH files than you would have created those s3 files yourself then FH isnt a good option.
Also depends on what do you with those s3 files. You need to find out if you are saving any work/money because of using Firehose against the manual creation of S3 files. Remember you cant reorder the content of the s3 files.
I'm storing some events into DynamoDB. I have to sync (i.e. copy incrementally) the data with Redshift. Ultimately, I want to be able to analyze the data through AWS Quicksight.
I've come across multiple solutions but those are either one-time (using the one-time COPY command) or real-time (a streaming data pipeline using Kinesis Firehose).
The real-time solution seems superior to hourly sync, but I'm worried about performance and complexity. I was wondering if there's an easier way to batch the updates on an hourly basis.
What you are looking for are DynamoDB Streams (official docs). This can seamlessly flow into the Kinesis firehose as you have correctly pointed out.
This is the most optimal way and provides the best balance between the cost, operational overhead and the functionality itself. Allow me explain how:
DynamoDB streams: Streams are triggered when any activity happens on the database. This means that unlike a process that will scan the data on a periodic basis and consume the read capacity even if there is no update, you will be notified of the new data.
Kinesis Firehose: You can configure the Firehose to batch data either by the size of the data or time. This means that if you have a good inflow, you can set the stream to batch the records received in each 2 minutes interval and then issue just one COPY command to redshift. Same goes for the size of the data in the stream buffer. Read more about it here.
The ideal way to load data into Redshift is via COPY command and Kinesis Firehose does just that. You can also configure it to automatically create backup of the data into S3.
Remember that a reactive or push based system is almost always more performant and less costly than a reactive or push based system. You save on the compute capacity needed to run a cron process and also continuously scan for updates.
My use-case is as follows:
I have JSON data coming in which needs to be stored in S3 in parquet format. So far so good, I can create a schema in Glue and attach a "DataFormatConversionConfiguration" to my firehose stream. BUT the data is coming from different "topics". Each topic has a particular "schema". From my understanding I will have to create multiple firehose streams, as one stream can only have one schema. But I have thousands of such topics with very high volume high throughput data incoming. It does not look feasible to create so many firehose resources (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/dev/limits.html)
How should I go about building my pipeline.
IMO you can:
ask for upgrade of your Firehose limit and do everything with 1 Firehose/stream + add Lambda transformation to convert the data into a common schema - IMO not cost-efficient but you should see with your load.
create a Lambda for each Kinesis data stream, convert each event to the schema managed by a single Firehose and at the end can send the events directly to your Firehose stream with Firehose API https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/APIReference/API_PutRecord.html (see "Q: How do I add data to my Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose delivery stream?" here https://aws.amazon.com/kinesis/data-firehose/faqs/) - but also, check the costs before because even though your Lambdas are invoked "on demand", you may have a lot of them invoked during long period of time.
use one of data processing frameworks (Apache Spark, Apache Flink, ...) and read your data from Kinesis in batches of 1 hour, starting every time when you terminated last time --> use available sinks to convert the data and write it in Parquet format. The frameworks use the notion of checkpointing and store the last processed offset in an external storage. Now, if you restart them every hour, they will start to read the data directly from the last seen entry. - It may be cost-efficient, especially if you consider using spot instances. On the other side, it requires more coding that 2 previous solutions and obviously may have higher latency.
Hope that helps. You could please give a feedback about chosen solution ?
Question
I've read this and this and this articles. But they provide contradictory answers to the question: how to customize partitioning on ingesting data to S3 from Kinesis Stream?
More details
Currently, I'm using Firehose to deliver data from Kinesis Streams to Athena. Afterward, data will be processed with EMR Spark.
From time to time I have to handle historical bulk ingest into Kinesis Streams. The issue is that my Spark logic hardly depends on data partitioning and order of event handling. But Firehouse supports partitioning only by ingestion_time (into Kinesis Stream), not by any other custom field (I need by event_time).
For example, under Firehouse's partition 2018/12/05/12/some-file.gz I can get data for the last few years.
Workarounds
Could you please help me to choose between the following options?
Copy/partition data from Kinesis Steam with help of custom lambda. But this looks more complex and error-prone for me. Maybe because I'm not very familiar with AWS lambdas. Moreover, I'm not sure how well it will perform on bulk load. At this article it was said that Lambda option is much more expensive than Firehouse delivery.
Load data with Firehouse, then launch Spark EMR job to copy the data to another bucket with right partitioning. At least it sounds simpler for me (biased, I just starting with AWS Lambas). But it has the drawback of double-copy and additional spark Job.
At one hour I could have up to 1M rows that take up to 40 MB of memory (at compressed state). From Using AWS Lambda with Amazon Kinesis I know that Kinesis to Lambda event sourcing has a limitation of 10,000 records per batch. Would it be effective to process such volume of data with Lambda?
While Kinesis does not allow you to define custom partitions, Athena does!
The Kinesis stream will stream into a table, say data_by_ingestion_time, and you can define another table data_by_event_time that has the same schema, but is partitioned by event_time.
Now, you can make use of Athena's INSERT INTO capabilities to let you repartition data without needing to write Hadoop or a Spark job and you get the serverless scale-up of Athena for your data volume. You can use SNS, cron, or a workflow engine like Airflow to run this at whatever interval you need.
We dealt with this at my company and go in-to more depth details of the trade-offs of using EMR or a streaming solution, but now you don't need to introduce anymore systems like Lambda or EMR.
https://radar.io/blog/custom-partitions-with-kinesis-and-athena
you may use the kinesis stream, and create the partitions like you wants.
you create a producer, and in your consumer, create the partitions.
https://aws.amazon.com/pt/kinesis/data-streams/getting-started/
Firehose->S3 uses the current date as a prefix for creating keys in S3. So this partitions the data by the time the record is written. My firehose stream contains events which have a specific event time.
Is there a way to create S3 keys containing this event time instead? Processing tools downstream depend on each event being in an "hour-folder" related to when it actually happened. Or would that have to be an additional processing step after Firehose is done?
The event time could be in the partition key or I could use a Lambda function to parse it from the record.
Kinesis Firehose doesn't (yet) allow clients to control how the date suffix of the final S3 objects is generated.
The only option with you is to add a post-processing layer after Kinesis Firehose. For e.g., you could schedule an hourly EMR job, using Data Pipeline, that reads all files written in last hour and publishes them to correct S3 destinations.
It's not an answer for the question, however I would like to explain a little bit the idea behind storing records in accordance with event arrival time.
First a few words about streams. Kinesis is just a stream of data. And it has a concept of consuming. One can reliable consume a stream only by reading it sequentially. And there is also an idea of checkpoints as a mechanism for pausing and resuming the consuming process. A checkpoint is just a sequence number which identifies a position in the stream. Via specifying this number, one can start reading the stream from the certain event.
And now go back to default s3 firehose setup... Since the capacity of kinesis stream is quite limited, most probably one needs to store somewhere the data from kinesis to analyze it later. And the firehose to s3 setup does this right out of the box. It just stores raw data from the stream to s3 buckets. But logically this data is the still the same stream of records. And to be able to reliable consume (read) this stream one needs these sequential numbers for checkpoints. And these numbers are records arrival times.
What if I want to read records by creation time? Looks like the proper way to accomplish this task is to read the s3 stream sequentially, dump it to some [time series] database or data warehouse and do creation-time-based readings against this storage. Otherwise there will be always a non-zero chance to miss some bunches of events while reading the s3 (stream). So I would not suggest the reordering of s3 buckets at all.
You'll need to do some post-processing or write a custom streaming consumer (such as Lambda) to do this.
We dealt with a huge event volume at my company, so writing a Lambda function didn't seem like a good use of money. Instead, we found batch-processing with Athena to be a really simple solution.
First, you stream into an Athena table, events, which can optionally be partitioned by an arrival-time.
Then, you define another Athena table, say, events_by_event_time which is partitioned by the event_time attribute on your event, or however it's been defined in the schema.
Finally, you schedule a process to run an Athena INSERT INTO query that takes events from events and automatically repartitions them to events_by_event_time and now your events are partitioned by event_time without requiring EMR, data pipelines, or any other infrastructure.
You can do this with any attribute on your events. It's also worth noting you can create a view that does a UNION of the two tables to query real-time and historic events.
I actually wrote more about this in a blog post here.
For future readers - Firehose supports Custom Prefixes for Amazon S3 Objects
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/dev/s3-prefixes.html
AWS started offering "Dynamic Partitioning" in Aug 2021:
Dynamic partitioning enables you to continuously partition streaming data in Kinesis Data Firehose by using keys within data (for example, customer_id or transaction_id) and then deliver the data grouped by these keys into corresponding Amazon Simple Storage Service (Amazon S3) prefixes.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/dev/dynamic-partitioning.html
Look at https://docs.aws.amazon.com/firehose/latest/dev/dynamic-partitioning.html. You can implement a lambda function which takes your records, processes them, changes the partition key and then sends them back to firehose to be added. You would also have the change the firehose to enable this partitioning and also define your custom partition key/prefix/suffix.