kafka-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Managing KafkaMessageStreams
Date Fri, 30 Sep 2011 03:21:15 GMT

Typically, one would just create all streams in a single
There is no harm to call createMessageStreams multiple times, even on the
same topic, although I can't think of a good reason why you need that.

There is not much difference whether you use one connector or multiple ones.
Typically, you just need one connector.

To consume from a stream, you would just iterate through the messages in a
loop in a thread. If you want to stop, you can just check an isStopping
variable. The problem is that if there is no new message, the next call on
the stream blocks and you don't get a chance to check the variable. That's
what consumerTimeoutMs is used for. If consumerTimeoutMs is set, the next
call will throw an exception if no message is received within the timeout
period. Then you can catch the exception and then check the isStopping



On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Bateman, Matt <mabateman@ebay.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> Apologies if I've missed something obvious.
> First, is there any reason not to call the
> ConsumerConnector.createMessageStreams() more than once to create streams
> for the same topic? Or should all streams be created at a single point in
> time?
> Second, is there a "safe" way to stop reading from a KafkaMessageStream?
> Currently I'm just interrupting the thread when I need to stop reading from
> the stream. There is no "close" or "shutdown" method though. (Also, the
> Scala class doesn't annotate that InterruptedException can be thrown,
> requiring some gymnastics to be performed into to correctly handle that
> exception.)
> Third, (depending on the answer to 2) is it better to create more than one
> ConsumerConnector to manage sets of streams? The ConsumerConnector seems to
> have a clear "shutdown" method. Calling that would shut down all the streams
> that are associated with it.
> Fourth, I see the "consumerTimeoutMs" attribute to timeout a consumer. Is
> there a cleaner way to achieve this at a more granular level? For instance,
> providing a timeout duration in the call to ConsumerIterator.next() that
> will simply return null?
> Thanks,
> Matt

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