I'm experiencing an issue I'm not sure how to start to track down. My Kafka
brokers often startup and then hang part way through startup. The log has
nothing useful to point to a problem and I'm not sure where to go from
here. I've pasted a startup log below; please advise how to proceed.
Thanks,
Hi Nik,
It seams that the problem is not on the startup because the logs shows that it
took about 2 secs to start. How exactly did you detect that it stuck?
Cheers,
Barbosa
Enviado do Yahoo Mail no Android
Em sex, 21 21e jun 21e 2019 às 5:52, Nik
Hodgkinson<11x...@gmail.com> escreveu:
+1 (non-binding)
* Ran unit and integration test on 2.11 and 2.12
* Verified quick start
* Ran internal apps on the 3 node cluster
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:33 AM Colin McCabe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We discovered some problems with the second release candidate (RC2) of
> 2.3.0. Specifically, KAF
Thank you so much for the detailed explanation, Matthias!
It's really helpful! Hope you have a good weekend :)
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 5:30 PM Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> The observed behavior is expected.
>
> > For example, if we send 2615 events to an empty topic, we expect the end
> of
> >> the
Sure, the record cache attempts to save downstream operators from
unnecessary updates by also buffering for a short amount of time
before forwarding. It forwards results whenever the cache fills up or
whenever there is a commit. If you're happy to wait at least "commit
interval" amount of time for
That change "In the same partition" must explain what we are seeing. Unless you
see one message per partition, all windows will not expire. That is an
interesting twist. Thanks for the correction ( I will go back and confirm this.
-mohan
On 6/21/19, 12:40 PM, "John Roesler" wrote:
Sure,
No problem. It's definitely a subtlety. It occurs because each
partition is processed completely independently of the others, so
"stream time" is tracked per partition, and there's no way to look
across at the other partitions to find out what stream time they have.
In general, it's not a problem
I would recommend to move this discussion to the dev list.
-Matthias
On 6/20/19 7:42 PM, M. Manna wrote:
> It's done. Sorry for the confusion.
>
> The KIP table however, showed that it's been accepted. But yes it's better
> to keep all places consistent.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 at
