Thanks for the KIP Matt. Regarding the handle interface of ProductionExceptionHandlerResponse, could you write it on the wiki also, along with the actual added config names (e.g. what https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-161%3A+streams+deserialization+exception+handlers described).
The question I had about then handle parameters are around the record, should it be `ProducerRecord<byte[], byte[]>`, or be generics of `ProducerRecord<? extends K, ? extends V>` or `ProducerRecord<? extends Object, ? extends Object>`? Also, should the handle function include the `RecordMetadata` as well in case it is not null? We may probably try to write down at least the following handling logic and see if the given API is sufficient for it: 1) throw exception immediately to fail fast and stop the world, 2) log the error and drop record and proceed silently, 3) send such errors to a specific "error" Kafka topic, or record it as an app-level metrics ( https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#kafka_streams_monitoring) for monitoring. Guozhang On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Matt Farmer <m...@frmr.me> wrote: > I did some more digging tonight. > > @Ted: It looks like the deserialization handler uses > "default.deserialization.exception.handler" for the config name. No > ".class" on the end. I'm inclined to think this should use > "default.production.exception.handler". > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 8:22 PM Matt Farmer <m...@frmr.me> wrote: > > > Okay, I've dug into this a little bit. > > > > I think getting access to the serialized record is possible, and changing > > the naming and return type is certainly doable. However, because we're > > hooking into the onCompletion callback we have no guarantee that the > > ProcessorContext state hasn't changed by the time this particular handler > > runs. So I think the signature would change to something like: > > > > ProductionExceptionHandlerResponse handle(final ProducerRecord<..> > record, > > final Exception exception) > > > > Would this be acceptable? > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:33 PM Matt Farmer <m...@frmr.me> wrote: > > > >> Ah good idea. Hmmm. I can line up the naming and return type but I’m not > >> sure if I can get my hands on the context and the record itself without > >> other changes. > >> > >> Let me dig in and follow up here tomorrow. > >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:14 PM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks for the KIP. > >>> > >>> Are you familiar with KIP-161? > >>> > >>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-161%3A+streams+ > deserialization+exception+handlers > >>> > >>> I thinks, we should align the design (parameter naming, return types, > >>> class names etc) of KIP-210 to KIP-161 to get a unified user > experience. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -Matthias > >>> > >>> > >>> On 10/18/17 4:20 PM, Matt Farmer wrote: > >>> > I’ll create the JIRA ticket. > >>> > > >>> > I think that config name will work. I’ll update the KIP accordingly. > >>> > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 6:09 PM Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Can you create JIRA that corresponds to the KIP ? > >>> >> > >>> >> For the new config, how about naming it > >>> >> production.exception.processor.class > >>> >> ? This way it is clear that class name should be specified. > >>> >> > >>> >> Cheers > >>> >> > >>> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Matt Farmer <m...@frmr.me> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >>> Hello everyone, > >>> >>> > >>> >>> This is the discussion thread for the KIP that I just filed here: > >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >>> >>> 210+-+Provide+for+custom+error+handling++when+Kafka+ > >>> >>> Streams+fails+to+produce > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Looking forward to getting some feedback from folks about this idea > >>> and > >>> >>> working toward a solution we can contribute back. :) > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Cheers, > >>> >>> Matt Farmer > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > -- -- Guozhang
