Hey Rajiv, the bug was on the client. Here's a link to the JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-2978.
-Jason On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Rajiv Kurian <ra...@signalfx.com> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > Was this a server bug or a client bug? > > Thanks, > Rajiv > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > Apologies for the late arrival to this thread. There was a bug in the > > 0.9.0.0 release of Kafka which could cause the consumer to stop fetching > > from a partition after a rebalance. If you're seeing this, please > checkout > > the 0.9.0 branch of Kafka and see if you can reproduce this problem. If > you > > can, then it would be really helpful if you file a JIRA with the steps to > > reproduce. > > > > From Han's initial example, it kind of looks like the problem might be in > > the usage. The consumer lag as shown by the kafka-consumer-groups script > > relies on the last committed position to determine lag. To update > progress, > > you need to commit offsets regularly. In the gist, offsets are only > > committed on shutdown or when a rebalance occurs. When the group is > stable, > > no progress will be seen because there are no commits to update the > > position. > > > > Thanks, > > Jason > > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Han JU <ju.han.fe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Issue created: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3146 > > > > > > > > 2016-01-25 16:07 GMT+01:00 Han JU <ju.han.fe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > Hi Bruno, > > > > > > > > > > Can you tell me a little bit more about that? A seek() in the > > > > > `onPartitionAssigned`? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > > > 2016-01-25 10:51 GMT+01:00 Han JU <ju.han.fe...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > >> Ok I'll create a JIRA issue on this. > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks! > > > > >> > > > > >> 2016-01-23 21:47 GMT+01:00 Bruno Rassaerts < > > > bruno.rassae...@novazone.be > > > > >: > > > > >> > > > > >>> +1 here > > > > >>> > > > > >>> As a workaround we seek to the current offset which resets the > > > current > > > > >>> clients internal states and everything continues. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Regards, > > > > >>> Bruno Rassaerts | Freelance Java Developer > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Novazone, Edingsesteenweg 302, B-1755 Gooik, Belgium > > > > >>> T: +32(0)54/26.02.03 - M:+32(0)477/39.01.15 > > > > >>> bruno.rassae...@novazone.be -www.novazone.be > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On 23 Jan 2016, at 17:52, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Hi, > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Can you please file an issue in JIRA so that we make sure this > is > > > > >>> > investigated? > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > Ismael > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Han JU < > ju.han.fe...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Hi, > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> I'm prototyping with the new consumer API of kafka 0.9 and I'm > > > > >>> particularly > > > > >>> >> interested in the `ConsumerRebalanceListener`. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> My test setup is like the following: > > > > >>> >> - 5M messages pre-loaded in one node kafka 0.9 > > > > >>> >> - 12 partitions, auto offset commit set to false > > > > >>> >> - in `onPartitionsRevoked`, commit offset and flush the local > > > state > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> The test run is like the following: > > > > >>> >> - launch one process with 2 consumers and let it consume for > a > > > > while > > > > >>> >> - launch another process with 2 consumers, this triggers a > > > > >>> rebalancing, > > > > >>> >> and let these 2 processes run until messages are all consumed > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> The code is here: > > > > https://gist.github.com/darkjh/fe1e5a5387bf13b4d4dd > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> So at first, the 2 consumers of the first process each got 6 > > > > >>> partitions. > > > > >>> >> And after the rebalancing, each consumer got 3 partitions. > It's > > > > >>> confirmed > > > > >>> >> by logging inside the `onPartitionAssigned` callback. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> But after the rebalancing, one of the 2 consumers of the first > > > > >>> process stop > > > > >>> >> receiving messages, even if it has partitions assigned to: > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 7237 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 7263 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> 2016-01-22 15:50:37,533 [INFO] [pool-1-thread-2] > > > > >>> >> o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Attempt to heart beat failed > > > since > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> >> group is rebalancing, try to re-join group. > > > > >>> >> balance-1 flush @ 536637 > > > > >>> >> balance-1 committed offset for List(balance-11, balance-10, > > > > balance-9, > > > > >>> >> balance-8, balance-7, balance-6) > > > > >>> >> 2016-01-22 15:50:37,575 [INFO] [pool-1-thread-1] > > > > >>> >> o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Attempt to heart beat failed > > > since > > > > >>> the > > > > >>> >> group is rebalancing, try to re-join group. > > > > >>> >> balance-0 flush @ 543845 > > > > >>> >> balance-0 committed offset for List(balance-5, balance-4, > > > balance-3, > > > > >>> >> balance-2, balance-1, balance-0) > > > > >>> >> balance-0 got assigned List(balance-5, balance-4, balance-3) > > > > >>> >> balance-1 got assigned List(balance-11, balance-10, balance-9) > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 3625 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3621 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3631 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3631 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 0 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3643 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3643 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 0 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3622 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3632 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 0 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3637 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3641 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3640 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 0 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3632 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-0 pulled 3630 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> balance-1 pulled 0 msgs ... > > > > >>> >> ...... > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> `balance-0` and `balance-1` are the names of the consumer > > thread. > > > So > > > > >>> after > > > > >>> >> the rebalancing, thread `balance-1` continues to poll but no > > > message > > > > >>> >> arrive, given that it has got 3 partitions assigned to after > the > > > > >>> >> rebalancing. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Finally other 3 consumers pulls all their partitions' message, > > the > > > > >>> >> situation is like > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> GROUP, TOPIC, PARTITION, CURRENT OFFSET, LOG END OFFSET, LAG, > > > OWNER > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 9, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-2_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 10, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-2_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 11, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-2_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 6, 180269, 417467, 237198, consumer-2_/ > > > > >>> 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 7, 180036, 417468, 237432, consumer-2_/ > > > > >>> 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 8, 180197, 417467, 237270, consumer-2_/ > > > > >>> 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 3, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 4, 417468, 417468, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 5, 417468, 417468, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 0, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 1, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> balance-test, balance, 2, 417467, 417467, 0, consumer-1_/ > > > 127.0.0.1 > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> So you can see, partition [6, 7, 8] still has messages, but > the > > > > >>> consumer > > > > >>> >> can't pull them after the rebalancing. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> I've tried 0.9.0.0 release, trunk and 0.9.0 branch, for both > > > > >>> server/broker > > > > >>> >> and client. > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> I hope the code is clear enough to illustrate/reproduce the > > > problem. > > > > >>> It's > > > > >>> >> quite a surprise for me because this is the main feature of > the > > > new > > > > >>> >> consumer API, but it does not seem to work properly. > > > > >>> >> Feel free to talk to me for any details. > > > > >>> >> -- > > > > >>> >> *JU Han* > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> Software Engineer @ Teads.tv > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> +33 0619608888 > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -- > > > > >> *JU Han* > > > > >> > > > > >> Software Engineer @ Teads.tv > > > > >> > > > > >> +33 0619608888 > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > *JU Han* > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineer @ Teads.tv > > > > > > > > > > +33 0619608888 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > *JU Han* > > > > > > > > Software Engineer @ Teads.tv > > > > > > > > +33 0619608888 > > > > > > > > > >
