kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Offset committing on rebalance
Date Thu, 15 Aug 2013 14:53:45 GMT
We are only patching blocker issues in 0.7. 0.8 beta1 has been released and
most dev effort will be on 0.8 and beyond. That said. This particular case
is easy to fix. If you can port the patch in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-919 o the 0.7 branch , we can
commit that to the 0.7 branch.

Thanks,

Jun


On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Ian Friedman <ian@flurry.com> wrote:

> Ugh.
>
> Is there any way to make this work in 0.7, or is transitioning to 0.8 the
> only way? My operations engineers spent a lot of effort in configuring and
> hardening our 0.7 production install, and 0.8 isn't released yet. Not to
> mention having to integrate the new client side code.
>
> Either way, thanks for all your help Jun.
>
> --
> Ian Friedman
>
>
> On Thursday, August 15, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Jun Rao wrote:
>
> > Yes, this is an issue and has been fixed in 0.8.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jun
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 5:21 PM, Ian Friedman <ian@flurry.com (mailto:
> ian@flurry.com)> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey guys,
> > >
> > > I designed my consumer app (running on 0.7) to run with autocommit off
> and
> > > commit manually once it was done processing a record. The intent was so
> > > that if a consumer died while processing a message, the offset would
> not be
> > > committed, and another box would pick up the partition and reprocess
> the
> > > message. This seemed to work fine with small numbers of consumers
> (~10).
> > > But now that I'm scaling it out, I'm running into a problem where it
> looks
> > > like messages that consumers picked up and then errored on are not
> getting
> > > processed on another machine.
> > >
> > > After investigating the logs and the partition offsets in zookeeper, I
> > > found that in ZookeeperConsumerConnector.scala closeFetchersForQueues,
> > > called during the rebalance process, will commit the offset regardless
> of
> > > the autocommit status. So it looks like even if my consumer is in the
> > > middle of processing a message, the offset will be committed, and even
> if
> > > the processing fails, it will never be picked up again. Now that I
> have a
> > > lot of consumer nodes, the rebalancer is going off a lot more often
> and I'm
> > > running into this constantly.
> > >
> > > Were my assumptions faulty? Did I design this wrong? After reading the
> > > comment in the code I understand that if it didn't commit the offset
> there,
> > > the message would just get immediately consumed by whoever ended up
> owning
> > > the partition, even if we were in the middle of consuming it
> elsewhere, and
> > > we'd get unintentional duplicate delivery. How can I make it work the
> way
> > > I've described? Is there any way?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ian Friedman
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message