[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10683?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17229992#comment-17229992
]
Gary Russell commented on KAFKA-10683:
--------------------------------------
In my opinion, Kafka should "hide" this pseudo lag - requiring the application
to do this position()/commit() hack is not the correct solution, even if it
worked in all circumstances, which it doesn't. It also adds overhead.
> Consumer.position() Ignores Transaction Marker with read_uncommitted
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-10683
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10683
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: clients, core
> Affects Versions: 2.6.0
> Reporter: Gary Russell
> Priority: Minor
>
> The workaround for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-6607# Says:
> {quote}
> or use `consumer.position()` that takes the commit marker into account and
> would "step over it")
> {quote}
> Note that this problem occurs with all consumers, not just Streams. We have
> implemented this solution in our project (as an option for those users
> concerned about the pseudo lag).
> We have discovered that this technique will only work with
> {code}isolation.level=read_committed{code} Otherwise, the
> {code}position(){code} call does not include the marker "record".
> https://github.com/spring-projects/spring-kafka/issues/1587#issuecomment-721899560
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
