One thing proposed by Jason:
If you want to only reset offset upon initialization, and by initialization
you mean "no committed offset", you can do sth. like the following in
rebalance callback.
@Override
public void onPartitionsAssigned(Collection<TopicPartition>
partitions) {
for (TopicPartition partition : partitions)
if (consumer.committed(partition) == null)
consumer.seekToBeginning(partition);
}
Guozhang
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3370.
>
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org> wrote:
>
>> That sounds like an interesting way of addressing the problem, can
>> continue further discussions on the JIRA
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Cody:
>> >
>> > More specifically, you do not need the "listTopics" function if you
>> already
>> > know your subscribed topics, just use "partitionsFor" is sufficient.
>> >
>> > About the fix, I'm thinking of adding two more options in the
>> > auto.offset.rest, say namely "earliest-on-start" and "latest-on-start",
>> > which sets the reset position ONLY at starting up. The reason is that
>> the
>> > seekToXX was actually not designed to do such initialization but for
>> > calling during the lifetime of the consumer, and we'd better provide the
>> > right solution to do so.
>> >
>> > I can file the JIRA right away and start further discussions there. But
>> let
>> > me know if you have any other ideas.
>> >
>> > Guozhang
>> >
>> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yeah, I think I understood what you were saying. What I'm saying is
>> >> that if there were a way to just fetch metadata without doing the rest
>> >> of the work poll() does, it wouldn't be necessary. I guess I can do
>> >> listTopics to get all metadata for all topics and then parse it.
>> >>
>> >> Regarding running a single instance, that is the case for what I'm
>> >> talking about.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> > Cody,
>> >> >
>> >> > What I meant for a special case of `seekToXX` is that, today when the
>> >> > function is called with no partition parameters. It will try to
>> execute
>> >> the
>> >> > logic on all "assigned" partitions for the consumer. And once that is
>> >> done,
>> >> > the subsequent poll() will not throw the exception since it knows
>> those
>> >> > partitions needs to reset offsets.
>> >> >
>> >> > However for your case, there is no assigned partitions yet, and hence
>> >> > `seekToXX` will not take effects on any partitions. The assignment is
>> >> > wrapped in the poll() call as you mentioned. And one way to solve it
>> is
>> >> to
>> >> > let the `seekToXX()` with no parameters do the coordination and get
>> the
>> >> > assigned partitions if there are any subscribed topics, so that the
>> >> > subsequent poll() will know those partitions need resetting offsets.
>> Does
>> >> > that make sense?
>> >> >
>> >> > As for now another way I can think of is to get the partition info
>> >> > beforehand and call `seekToBeginning` on all partitions. But that
>> only
>> >> > works if the consumer knows it is going to get all the partitions
>> >> assigned
>> >> > to itself (i.e. you are only running a single instance).
>> >> >
>> >> > Guozhang
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Another unfortunate thing about ConsumerRebalanceListener is that in
>> >> >> order to do meaningful work in the callback, you need a reference to
>> >> >> the consumer that called it. But that reference isn't provided to
>> the
>> >> >> callback, which means the listener implementation needs to hold a
>> >> >> reference to the consumer. Seems like this makes it unnecessarily
>> >> >> awkward to serialize or provide a 0 arg constructor for the
>> listener.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:28 AM, Cody Koeninger <c...@koeninger.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > I thought about ConsumerRebalanceListener, but seeking to the
>> >> >> > beginning any time there's a rebalance for whatever reason is not
>> >> >> > necessarily the same thing as seeking to the beginning before
>> first
>> >> >> > starting the consumer.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Kamal C <kamaltar...@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Cody,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Use ConsumerRebalanceListener to achieve that,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> ConsumerRebalanceListener listener = new
>> ConsumerRebalanceListener()
>> >> {
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @Override
>> >> >> >> public void
>> >> onPartitionsRevoked(Collection<TopicPartition>
>> >> >> >> partitions) {
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @Override
>> >> >> >> public void
>> >> onPartitionsAssigned(Collection<TopicPartition>
>> >> >> >> partitions) {
>> >> >> >> consumer.seekToBeginning(partitions.toArray(new
>> >> >> >> TopicPartition[0]));
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >> };
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> consumer.subscribe(topics, listener);
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Cody Koeninger <
>> c...@koeninger.org>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> That suggestion doesn't work, for pretty much the same reason -
>> at
>> >> the
>> >> >> >>> time poll is first called, there is no reset policy and no
>> committed
>> >> >> >>> offset, so NoOffsetForPartitionException is thrown
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> I feel like the underlying problem isn't so much that seekToEnd
>> >> needs
>> >> >> >>> special case behavior. It's more that topic metadata fetches,
>> >> >> >>> consumer position fetches, and message fetches are all lumped
>> >> together
>> >> >> >>> under a single poll() call, with no way to do them individually
>> if
>> >> >> >>> necessary.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> What does "work" in this situation is to just catch the
>> exception
>> >> >> >>> (which leaves the consumer in a state where topics are
>> assigned) and
>> >> >> >>> then seek. But that is not exactly an elegant interface.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> consumer.subscribe(topics)
>> >> >> >>> try {
>> >> >> >>> consumer.poll(0)
>> >> >> >>> } catch {
>> >> >> >>> case x: Throwable =>
>> >> >> >>> }
>> >> >> >>> consumer.seekToBeginning()
>> >> >> >>> consumer.poll(0)
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Guozhang Wang <
>> wangg...@gmail.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> > Hi Cody,
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > The problem with that code is in `seekToBeginning()` followed
>> by
>> >> >> >>> > `subscribe(topic)`.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Since `subscribe` call is lazy evaluated, by the time
>> >> >> `seekToBeginning()`
>> >> >> >>> > is called no partition is assigned yet, and hence it is
>> >> effectively
>> >> >> an
>> >> >> >>> > no-op.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Try
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > consumer.subscribe(topics)
>> >> >> >>> > consumer.poll(0); // get assigned partitions
>> >> >> >>> > consumer.seekToBeginning()
>> >> >> >>> > consumer.poll(0)
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > to see if that works.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > I think it is a valid issue that can be fixed in the new
>> consumer
>> >> >> that,
>> >> >> >>> > upon calling seekToEnd/Beginning with no parameter, while no
>> >> >> assigned is
>> >> >> >>> > done yet, do the coordination behind the scene; it will though
>> >> >> change the
>> >> >> >>> > behavior of the functions as they are no longer always lazily
>> >> >> evaluated.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Guozhang
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Cody Koeninger <
>> >> c...@koeninger.org>
>> >> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >> Using the 0.9 consumer, I would like to start consuming at
>> the
>> >> >> >>> >> beginning or end, without specifying auto.offset.reset.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> This does not seem to be possible:
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> val kafkaParams = Map[String, Object](
>> >> >> >>> >> "bootstrap.servers" -> conf.getString("kafka.brokers"),
>> >> >> >>> >> "key.deserializer" -> classOf[StringDeserializer],
>> >> >> >>> >> "value.deserializer" -> classOf[StringDeserializer],
>> >> >> >>> >> "group.id" -> "example",
>> >> >> >>> >> "auto.offset.reset" -> "none"
>> >> >> >>> >> ).asJava
>> >> >> >>> >> val topics =
>> >> >> conf.getString("kafka.topics").split(",").toList.asJava
>> >> >> >>> >> val consumer = new KafkaConsumer[String,
>> String](kafkaParams)
>> >> >> >>> >> consumer.subscribe(topics)
>> >> >> >>> >> consumer.seekToBeginning()
>> >> >> >>> >> consumer.poll(0)
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Results in:
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Exception in thread "main"
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.NoOffsetForPartitionException:
>> >> >> >>> >> Undefined offset with no reset policy for partition:
>> testtwo-4
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.internals.Fetcher.resetOffset(Fetcher.java:288)
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.internals.Fetcher.updateFetchPositions(Fetcher.java:167)
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.KafkaConsumer.updateFetchPositions(KafkaConsumer.java:1302)
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.KafkaConsumer.pollOnce(KafkaConsumer.java:895)
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> org.apache.kafka.clients.consumer.KafkaConsumer.poll(KafkaConsumer.java:853)
>> >> >> >>> >> at
>> >> >> example.BasicKafkaConsumer$.main(BasicKafkaConsumer.scala:25)
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> I'm assuming this is because, at the time seekToBeginning()
>> is
>> >> >> called,
>> >> >> >>> >> subscriptions.assignedPartitions isn't populated. But
>> polling in
>> >> >> >>> >> order to assign topicpartitions results in an error, which
>> >> creates a
>> >> >> >>> >> chicken-or-the-egg situation.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> I don't want to set auto.offset.reset, because I want a hard
>> >> error
>> >> >> if
>> >> >> >>> >> the offsets are out of range at any other time during
>> >> consumption.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > --
>> >> >> >>> > -- Guozhang
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > -- Guozhang
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > -- Guozhang
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
>
--
-- Guozhang
