[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-736?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13566883#comment-13566883
 ] 

Jay Kreps commented on KAFKA-736:
---------------------------------

1. It would be good to remove getShutdownReceive() too. I think that method is 
totally unnecessary.
2. It would be good to remove getEmptyResponse and just have KafkaApis enqueue 
the request object with the send null. The scala style isn't to start with 
getXXX and in any case I don't think this is an operation that our request 
channel would do.
3. Yes, just changing the parameter name for doSend was all I had in mind.
4. I'm not sure I understand the perf numbers will swing by.
                
> Add an option to the 0.8 producer to mimic 0.7 producer behavior
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: KAFKA-736
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-736
>             Project: Kafka
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: producer 
>    Affects Versions: 0.8
>            Reporter: Neha Narkhede
>            Assignee: Neha Narkhede
>            Priority: Blocker
>              Labels: p2, replication-performance
>         Attachments: kafka-736-draft.patch, kafka-736-v1.patch, 
> kafka-736-v2.patch
>
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>  Remaining Estimate: 24h
>
> I profiled a producer throughput benchmark between a producer and a remote 
> broker. It turns out that the background send threads spends ~97% of its time 
> waiting to read the acknowledgement from the broker.
> I propose we change the current behavior of request.required.acks=0 to mean 
> no acknowledgement from the broker. This will mimic the 0.7 producer behavior 
> and will enable tuning the producer for very high throughput.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Reply via email to