Have you considered abstracting offset storage away so people could implement their own? Would you take a patch if I'd stabbed at it, and if yes, what's the process (pardon the n00b)?
KCBO, -- "If you can't conceal it well, expose it with all your might" Alex Zuzin On Friday, May 17, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote: > There is no particular need for storing the offsets in zookeeper. In fact > with Kafka 0.8, since partitions will be highly available, offsets could be > stored in Kafka topics. However, we haven't ironed out the design for this > yet. > > Thanks, > Neha > > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Scott Clasen <sc...@heroku.com > (mailto:sc...@heroku.com)> wrote: > > > afaik you dont 'have' to store the consumed offsets in zk right, this is > > only automatic with some of the clients? > > > > why not store them in a data store that can write at the rate that you > > require? > > > > > > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Withers, Robert <robert.with...@dish.com > > (mailto:robert.with...@dish.com) > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Update from our OPS team, regarding zookeeper 3.4.x. Given stability, > > > adoption of offset batching would be the only remaining bit of work to > > > > > > > do. > > > Still, I totally understand the restraint for 0.8... > > > > > > > > > "As exercise in upgradability of zookeeper, I did a "out-of-the"box" > > > upgrade on Zookeeper. I downloaded a generic distribution of Apache > > > Zookeeper and used it for the upgrade. > > > > > > Kafka included version of Zookeeper 3.3.3. > > > Out of the box Apache Zookeeper 3.4.5 (which I upgraded to) > > > > > > Running, working great. I did *not* have to wipe out the zookeeper > > > databases. All data stayed intact. > > > > > > I got a new feature, which allows auto-purging of logs. This keeps OPS > > > maintenance to a minimum." > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > rob > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Withers, Robert [mailto:robert.with...@dish.com] > > > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:38 AM > > > To: users@kafka.apache.org (mailto:users@kafka.apache.org) > > > Subject: RE: are commitOffsets botched to zookeeper? > > > > > > Fair enough, this is something to look forward to. I appreciate the > > > restraint you show to stay out of troubled waters. :) > > > > > > thanks, > > > rob > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: Neha Narkhede [neha.narkh...@gmail.com > > > (mailto:neha.narkh...@gmail.com)] > > > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:35 AM > > > To: users@kafka.apache.org (mailto:users@kafka.apache.org) > > > Subject: RE: are commitOffsets botched to zookeeper? > > > > > > Upgrading to a new zookeeper version is not an easy change. Also > > zookeeper > > > 3.3.4 is much more stable compared to 3.4.x. We think it is better not to > > > club 2 big changes together. So most likely this will be a post 08 item > > > > > > > for > > > stability purposes. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Neha > > > On May 17, 2013 6:31 AM, "Withers, Robert" <robert.with...@dish.com > > > (mailto:robert.with...@dish.com)> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Awesome! Thanks for the clarification. I would like to offer my > > > > strong vote that this get tackled before a beta, to get it firmly into > > > > > > > > > > 0.8. > > > > Stabilize everything else to the existing use, but make offset updates > > > > batched. > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > rob > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: Neha Narkhede [neha.narkh...@gmail.com > > > > (mailto:neha.narkh...@gmail.com)] > > > > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:17 AM > > > > To: users@kafka.apache.org (mailto:users@kafka.apache.org) > > > > Subject: RE: are commitOffsets botched to zookeeper? > > > > > > > > Sorry I wasn't clear. Zookeeper 3.4.x has this feature. As soon as 08 > > > > is stable and released it will be worth looking into when we can use > > > > zookeeper 3.4.x. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Neha > > > > On May 16, 2013 10:32 PM, "Rob Withers" <reefed...@gmail.com > > > > (mailto:reefed...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Can a request be made to zookeeper for this feature? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > rob > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Neha Narkhede [mailto:neha.narkh...@gmail.com] > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:53 PM > > > > > > To: users@kafka.apache.org (mailto:users@kafka.apache.org) > > > > > > Subject: Re: are commitOffsets botched to zookeeper? > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently Kafka depends on zookeeper 3.3.4 that doesn't have a > > > > > > batch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > write > > > > > > api. So if you commit after every message at a high rate, it will > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > slow > > > > > and > > > > > > inefficient. Besides it will cause zookeeper performance to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > degrade. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Neha > > > > > > On May 16, 2013 6:54 PM, "Rob Withers" <reefed...@gmail.com > > > > > > (mailto:reefed...@gmail.com)> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > We are calling commitOffsets after every message consumption. > > > > > > > It looks to be ~60% slower, with 29 partitions. If a single > > > > > > > KafkaStream thread is from a connector, and there are 29 > > > > > > > partitions, then commitOffsets sends 29 offset updates, correct? > > > > > > > Are these offset updates batched in one send to zookeeper? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > rob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
