Hi Matthias, We faced the issue again. The logs are below.
16:13:16.527 [StreamThread-7] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Marking the coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) dead for group grp_id 16:13:16.543 [StreamThread-3] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) for group grp_id. 16:13:16.543 [StreamThread-3] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Marking the coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) dead for group grp_id 16:13:16.547 [StreamThread-6] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) for group grp_id. 16:13:16.547 [StreamThread-6] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Marking the coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) dead for group grp_id 16:13:16.551 [StreamThread-1] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) for group grp_id. 16:13:16.551 [StreamThread-1] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Marking the coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) dead for group grp_id 16:13:16.572 [StreamThread-4] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) for group grp_id. 16:13:16.572 [StreamThread-4] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Marking the coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) dead for group grp_id 16:13:16.573 [StreamThread-2] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 (id: 2147483642 rack: null) for group grp_id. On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> wrote: > Great! Glad 0.10.2.1 fixes it for you! > > -Matthias > > On 5/7/17 8:57 PM, Mahendra Kariya wrote: > > Upgrading to 0.10.2.1 seems to have fixed the issue. > > > > Until now, we were looking at random 1 hour data to analyse the issue. > Over > > the weekend, we have written a simple test that will continuously check > for > > inconsistencies in real time and report if there is any issue. > > > > No issues have been reported for the last 24 hours. Will update this > thread > > if we find any issue. > > > > Thanks for all the support! > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:55 AM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > >> About > >> > >>> 07:44:08.493 [StreamThread-10] INFO o.a.k.c.c.i.AbstractCoordinator - > >>> Discovered coordinator broker-05:6667 for group group-2. > >> > >> Please upgrade to Streams 0.10.2.1 -- we fixed couple of bug and I would > >> assume this issue is fixed, too. If not, please report back. > >> > >>> Another question that I have is, is there a way for us detect how many > >>> messages have come out of order? And if possible, what is the delay? > >> > >> There is no metric or api for this. What you could do though is, to use > >> #transform() that only forwards each record and as a side task, extracts > >> the timestamp via `context#timestamp()` and does some book keeping to > >> compute if out-of-order and what the delay was. > >> > >> > >>>>> - same for .mapValues() > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I am not sure how to check this. > >> > >> The same way as you do for filter()? > >> > >> > >> -Matthias > >> > >> > >> On 5/4/17 10:29 AM, Mahendra Kariya wrote: > >>> Hi Matthias, > >>> > >>> Please find the answers below. > >>> > >>> I would recommend to double check the following: > >>>> > >>>> - can you confirm that the filter does not remove all data for those > >>>> time periods? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Filter does not remove all data. There is a lot of data coming in even > >>> after the filter stage. > >>> > >>> > >>>> - I would also check input for your AggregatorFunction() -- does it > >>>> receive everything? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Yes. Aggregate function seems to be receiving everything. > >>> > >>> > >>>> - same for .mapValues() > >>>> > >>> > >>> I am not sure how to check this. > >>> > >> > >> > > > >
