To clarify, I think this proposal is not seeking to add support for a subscription rate limiter. That support was added in 2018 [0]. It is instead seeking to make it possible to override the broker's configs for dispatch rate limiting per subscription [1].
> On the client side, subscriptions have different max-process-capacity. > If the dispatch rate is too large, they may crush their downstream services. Out of my own curiosity, will you explain why the existing `receiverQueueSize` configuration is not sufficient for protecting against the kind of over consumption? I would have expected that config to provide the necessary back pressure to protect applications, and I wouldn't expect rate limiting the subscription to be the recommended way to protect consumers. Thanks, Michael [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/1358 [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/ec3821176612621e24dfbc4345525849a729fb06/pulsar-broker-common/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/ServiceConfiguration.java#L881-L892 On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 12:58 PM Joe F <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > -1 > > The rate limits that are currently in place are there to protect the Pulsar > service, to manage multi-tenancy on the broker. This is not meant as a > feature to manage demand side throttling. > > In my opinion, this is best done as a client side feature. There is no > need to add complexity to the broker to manage demand side throttling. > Just throttle demand on the client side. > > > > -joe > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 7:54 PM Zixuan Liu <node...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Zixuan > > > > mattison chao <mattisonc...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月12日周二 09:24写道： > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Looks like a very useful feature. Thank you. > > > > > > Best, > > > Mattison > > > > > > On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 at 08:55, PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Penghui > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 4:24 PM Haiting Jiang <jianghait...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Pulsar community, > > > > > > > > > > I created a PIP to add support for subscription level dispatch rate > > > > > limiter setting. > > > > > > > > > > The proposal can be found: > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15094 > > > > > > > > > > ---- > > > > > > > > > > ## Motivation > > > > > > > > > > Currently, for message dispatch rate limiter in a subscription , we > > > have > > > > 3 > > > > > level setting : > > > > > - Broker level setting: configured with > > > > > `dispatchThrottlingRatePerSubscriptionInMsg` and > > > > > `dispatchThrottlingRatePerSubscriptionInByte` in broker.conf > > > > > - Namespace level setting: configured with > > > > > > > `org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.Namespaces#setSubscriptionDispatchRate` > > > > > - Topic level setting: configured with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.TopicPolicies#setSubscriptionDispatchRate` > > > > > > > > > > As we all know, in the pub-sub messaging model, different subscriber > > of > > > > > the same topic process the messages for various purpose, and they may > > > > have > > > > > different requirement of message dispatch rate limiter. Here are some > > > use > > > > > case in my organization: > > > > > - On the client side, subscriptions have different > > > max-process-capacity. > > > > > If the dispatch rate is too large, they may crush their downstream > > > > services. > > > > > - We are billing base on the max message rate of the subscription. > > Some > > > > > are sensitive to budgets and willing to pay less for lower > > throughput. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ## Goal > > > > > > > > > > Support subscription level dispatch rate limiter setting. > > > > > > > > > > ## API Changes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Add client api in org.apache.pulsar.client.admin.TopicPolicies. > > > > > ``` > > > > > void getSubscriptionDispatchRate(String topic, String sub) throws > > > > > PulsarAdminException; > > > > > void getSubscriptionDispatchRate(String topic, String sub, boolean > > > > > applied) throws PulsarAdminException; > > > > > void setSubscriptionDispatchRate(String topic, String sub, > > DispatchRate > > > > > dispatchRate) throws PulsarAdminException; > > > > > void removeSubscriptionDispatchRate(String topic, String sub) throws > > > > > PulsarAdminException; > > > > > > > > > > //And the async version of these methods. > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > 2. Add new admin API > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > @PUT @DELETE @GET > > > > > @Path("/{tenant}/{namespace}/{topic}/{subName}/dispatchRate") > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > ## Implementation > > > > > > > > > > The rate limiter itself is already implemented with each > > subscription. > > > We > > > > > only need to update the rate limiter settings if subscription level > > > > config > > > > > is set. > > > > > I propose to just add a new field in > > > > > `org.apache.pulsar.common.policies.data.TopicPolicies` to store the > > > data. > > > > > ``` > > > > > private Map<String/*SubName*/, DispatchRateImpl> > > > > > subscriptionDispatchRateMap; > > > > > ``` > > > > > And subscription level rate limiter setting has higher priority than > > > > topic > > > > > level. We need to calculate the applied value when we create the > > > > > subscription or any level config is changed. > > > > > > > > > > ## Reject Alternatives > > > > > None yet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Haiting > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
