C0urante commented on a change in pull request #11524: URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/11524#discussion_r755307964
########## File path: connect/runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/connect/runtime/SubmittedRecords.java ########## @@ -68,6 +75,9 @@ SubmittedRecord submit(Map<String, Object> partition, Map<String, Object> offset SubmittedRecord result = new SubmittedRecord(partition, offset); records.computeIfAbsent(result.partition(), p -> new LinkedList<>()) .add(result); + synchronized (this) { + numUnackedMessages.incrementAndGet(); + } Review comment: It definitely feels like an anti-pattern to synchronize around modifications to an atomic field. I've gone into further detail below but TL;DR: this is a combination of wanting to avoid a race condition (hence the synchronized block) and wanting to silence SpotBugs warnings (hence the use of an `AtomicInteger` instead of a `volatile int`). -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org