Shlomi,

If you are on trunk, and your consumer subscriptions are identical
then you can try a slightly different partition assignment strategy.
Try setting partition.assignment.strategy="roundrobin" in your
consumer config.

Thanks,

Joel

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 06:29:30PM -0700, Jun Rao wrote:
> By consumer, I actually mean consumer threads (the thread # you used when
> creating consumer streams). So, if you have 4 consumers, each with 4
> threads, 4 of the threads will not get any data with 12 partitions. It
> sounds like that's not what you get?  What's the output of the
> ConsumerOffsetChecker (see http://kafka.apache.org/documentation.html)?
> 
> For consumer.id, you don't need to set it in general. We generate some uuid
> automatically.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jun
> 
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Shlomi Hazan <shl...@viber.com> wrote:
> 
> > Jun,
> >
> > I hear you say "partitions are evenly distributed among all consumers in
> > the same group", yet I did bump into a case where launching a process with
> > X high level consumer API threads took over all partitions, sending
> > existing consumers to be unemployed.
> >
> > According to the claim above, and if I am not mistaken:
> > on a topic T with 12 partitions and 3 consumers C1-C3 on the same group
> > with 4 threads each,
> > adding a new consumer C4 with 12 threads should yield the following
> > balance:
> > C1-C3 each relinquish a single partition holding only 3 partitions each.
> > C4 holds the 3 partitions relinquished by C1-C3.
> > Yet, in the case I described what happened is that C4 gained all 12
> > partitions and sent C1-C3 out of business with 0 partitions each.
> > Now maybe I overlooked something but I think I did see that happen.
> >
> > BTW
> > What key is used to distinguish one consumer from another? "consumer.id"?
> > docs for "consumer.id" are "Generated automatically if not set."
> > What is the best practice for setting it's value? leave empty? is server
> > host name good enough? what are the considerations?
> > When using the high level consumer API, are all threads identified as the
> > same consumer? I guess they are, right?...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shlomi
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > You can take a look at the "consumer rebalancing algorithm" part in
> > > http://kafka.apache.org/documentation.html. Basically, partitions are
> > > evenly distributed among all consumers in the same group. If there are
> > more
> > > consumers in a group than partitions, some consumers will never get any
> > > data.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jun
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:14 AM, Shlomi Hazan <shl...@viber.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > Using Kafka's high consumer API I have bumped into a situation where
> > > > launching a consumer process P1 with X consuming threads on a topic
> > with
> > > X
> > > > partition kicks out all other existing consumer threads that consumed
> > > prior
> > > > to launching the process P.
> > > > That is, consumer process P is stealing all partitions from all other
> > > > consumer processes.
> > > >
> > > > While understandable, it makes it hard to size & deploy a cluster with
> > a
> > > > number of partitions that will both allow balancing of consumption
> > across
> > > > consuming processes, dividing the partitions across consumers by
> > setting
> > > > each consumer with it's share of the total number of partitions on the
> > > > consumed topic, and on the other hand provide room for growth and
> > > addition
> > > > of new consumers to help with increasing traffic into the cluster and
> > the
> > > > topic.
> > > >
> > > > This stealing effect forces me to have more partitions then really
> > needed
> > > > at the moment, planning for future growth, or stick to what I need and
> > > > trust the option to add partitions which comes with a price in terms of
> > > > restarting consumers, bumping into out of order messages (hash
> > > > partitioning) etc.
> > > >
> > > > Is this policy of stealing is intended, or did I just jump to
> > > conclusions?
> > > > what is the way to cope with the sizing question?
> > > >
> > > > Shlomi
> > > >
> > >
> >

Reply via email to