The timeout in the poll call is more or less the timeout used by the
selector. So each call to poll will do socket activity on any ready
sockets, waiting for up to that time for a socket to be ready. There is no
longer any background threads involved in the consumer, all activity is
driven by the application thread(s).

The max fetch request wait time is controlled with a config and is
independent of the time given to poll.

-Jay

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Rajiv Kurian <ra...@signalfuse.com> wrote:

> I am trying to understand the semantics of the timeout specified in the
> poll method in
>
> http://kafka.apache.org/083/javadoc/index.html?org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.html
> .
> Is this timeout a measure of how long the fetch request will be parked on
> the broker waiting for a reply or is this more like the timeout in
> selector.select(long timeout) i.e. the method will return with whatever
> data is there after waiting a maximum of timeout. Exposing the selector
> timeout will be very helpful for us because we want to put a tight bound on
> how long we are ready to wait on the poll call. When this API is available
> we plan to use a single thread to get data from kafka, process them as well
> as run periodic jobs. For the periodic jobs to run we need a guarantee on
> how much time the poll call can take at most.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Rajiv Kurian <ra...@signalfuse.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, March 19, 2015, Jay Kreps <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Err, here:
> >>
> >>
> http://kafka.apache.org/083/javadoc/index.html?org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.html
> >>
> >> -Jay
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Jay Kreps <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > The current work in progress is documented here:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Rajiv Kurian <ra...@signalfuse.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Is there a link to the proposed new consumer non-blocking API?
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Rajiv
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to