[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-6119?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16219557#comment-16219557
]
Gary Y. edited comment on KAFKA-6119 at 10/25/17 9:33 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------
[~apurva] I have included a link to the runnable sources in the ticket. Can you
run the program and verify the behaviour? If you still need the logs, I can
provide them tomorrow as it is very late now in my time zone.
was (Author: gyao):
[~apurva] I have included a link to the runnable sources in the ticket Can you
run the program and verify the behaviour? If you still need the logs, I can
provide them tomorrow as it is very late now in my time zone.
> Silent Data Loss in Kafka011 Transactional Producer
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-6119
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-6119
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core, producer
> Affects Versions: 0.11.0.0, 0.11.0.1
> Environment: openjdk version "1.8.0_144"
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (Zulu 8.23.0.3-macosx) (build 1.8.0_144-b01)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (Zulu 8.23.0.3-macosx) (build 25.144-b01, mixed mode)
> Reporter: Gary Y.
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: reliability
>
> Kafka can lose data published by a transactional {{KafkaProducer}} under some
> circumstances, i.e., data that should be committed atomically may not be
> fully visible from a consumer with {{read_committed}} isolation level.
>
> *Steps to reproduce:*
> # Set {{transaction.timeout.ms}} to a low value such as {{100}}
> # Publish two messages in one transaction to different partitions of a topic
> with a sufficiently long time in-between the messages (e.g., 70 s).
> # Only the second message is visible with {{read_committed}} isolation level.
> See
> https://github.com/GJL/kafka011-transactional-producer-bug-demo/blob/master/src/main/java/com/garyyao/App.java
> for a full example. Detailed instructions can be found in the {{README.md}}:
> https://github.com/GJL/kafka011-transactional-producer-bug-demo
> *Why is this possible?*
> Because the transaction timeout is set to a low value, the transaction will
> be rolled back quickly after the first message is sent. Indeed, in the broker
> the following logs could be found:
> {code}
> [2017-10-25 22:54:58,224] INFO [Transaction Coordinator 0]: Initialized
> transactionalId test-producer-1508964897483 with producerId 5 and producer
> epoch 0 on partition __transaction_state-10
> (kafka.coordinator.transaction.TransactionCoordinator)
> [2017-10-25 22:55:24,260] INFO [Transaction Coordinator 0]: Completed
> rollback ongoing transaction of transactionalId: test-producer-1508964897483
> due to timeout (kafka.coordinator.transaction.TransactionCoordinator)
> {code}
> After rollback, the second message is sent to a different partition than the
> first message.
> Upon, transaction commit,
> {{org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.internals.TransactionManager}} may
> enqueue the request {{addPartitionsToTransactionHandler}}:
> {code}
> private TransactionalRequestResult
> beginCompletingTransaction(TransactionResult transactionResult) {
> if (!newPartitionsInTransaction.isEmpty())
> enqueueRequest(addPartitionsToTransactionHandler());
> EndTxnRequest.Builder builder = new
> EndTxnRequest.Builder(transactionalId, producerIdAndEpoch.producerId,
> producerIdAndEpoch.epoch, transactionResult);
> EndTxnHandler handler = new EndTxnHandler(builder);
> enqueueRequest(handler);
> return handler.result;
> }
> {code}
> As can be seen, the condition is fulfilled if {{newPartitionsInTransaction}}
> is non-empty. I suspect because the second message goes to a different
> partition, this condition is satisfied.
> In {{KafkaApis.scala}}, I can see that {{handleAddPartitionToTxnRequest}} may
> eventually call {{TransactionMetadata#prepareAddPartitions}}:
> {code}
> def prepareAddPartitions(addedTopicPartitions:
> immutable.Set[TopicPartition], updateTimestamp: Long): TxnTransitMetadata = {
> val newTxnStartTimestamp = state match {
> case Empty | CompleteAbort | CompleteCommit => updateTimestamp
> case _ => txnStartTimestamp
> }
> prepareTransitionTo(Ongoing, producerId, producerEpoch, txnTimeoutMs,
> (topicPartitions ++ addedTopicPartitions).toSet,
> newTxnStartTimestamp, updateTimestamp)
> }
> {code}
> Note that the method's first argument {{newState}} of is always *Ongoing*
> here. I suspect that this puts the transaction, which should be aborted, to
> _Ongoing_ again.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
