What exactly is your understanding of what's happening when you say "the
pipeline will be blocked by the group coordinator for up to "
max.poll.interval.ms""? Please explain that.

There's no universal recipe for "long-running jobs", there's just
particular issues you might be encountering and suggested solutions to
those issues.



On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 7:03 PM Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> I am not sure where I said about the "automatic partition reassignment",
> but what I know here is the side effect of increasing "
> max.poll.interval.ms"
> is if the consumer hangs for whatever reason the pipeline will be blocked
> by the group coordinator for up to "max.poll.interval.ms". So I am not
> sure
> if this is because of the automatic partition assignment or something else.
> What I am looking for is how I can deal with long-running jobs in Apache
> Kafka.
>
> Thanks,
> Ali
>
> On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 4:25 AM Chris Toomey <ctoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I interpreted your post as saying "when our consumer gets stuck, Kafka's
> > automatic partition reassignment kicks in and that's problematic for us."
> > Hence I suggested not using the automatic partition assignment, which per
> > my interpretation would address your issue.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 2:19 AM Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, Chris. So what is causing the consumer to get stuck is a side
> > > effect of the built-in partition assignment in Kafka and by overriding
> > that
> > > behaviour I should be able to address the long-running job issue, is
> that
> > > right? Can you please elaborate more on this?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ali
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 1:09 PM Chris Toomey <ctoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You really have to decide what behavior it is you want when one of
> your
> > > > consumers gets "stuck". If you don't like the way the group protocol
> > > > dynamically manages topic partition assignments or can't figure out
> an
> > > > appropriate set of configuration settings that achieve your goal, you
> > can
> > > > always elect to not use the group protocol and instead manage topic
> > > > partition assignment yourself. As I just replied to another post,
> > > there's a
> > > > nice writeup of this under  "Manual Partition Assignment" in
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://kafka.apache.org/24/javadoc/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.html
> > > >  .
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:37 AM Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > To help understanding my case in more details, the error I can see
> > > > > constantly is the consumer losing heartbeat and hence apparently
> the
> > > > group
> > > > > get rebalanced based on the log I can see from Kafka side:
> > > > >
> > > > > GroupCoordinator 11]: Member
> > > > > consumer-3-f46e14b4-5998-4083-b7ec-bed4e3f374eb in group foo has
> > > failed,
> > > > > removing it from the group
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Ali
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:38 PM Ali Nazemian <alinazem...@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With the emerge of using Apache Kafka for event-driven
> > architecture,
> > > > one
> > > > > > thing that has become important is how to tune apache Kafka
> > consumer
> > > to
> > > > > > manage long-running jobs. The main issue raises when we set a
> > > > relatively
> > > > > > large value for "max.poll.interval.ms". Setting this value will,
> > of
> > > > > > course, resolve the issue of repetitive rebalance, but creates
> > > another
> > > > > > operational issue. I am looking for some sort of golden strategy
> to
> > > > deal
> > > > > > with long-running jobs with Apache Kafka.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the consumer hangs for whatever reason, there is no easy way
> of
> > > > > passing
> > > > > > that stage. It can easily block the pipeline, and you cannot do
> > much
> > > > > about
> > > > > > it. Therefore, it came to my mind that I am probably missing
> > > something
> > > > > > here. What are the expectations? Is it not valid to use Apache
> > Kafka
> > > > for
> > > > > > long-live jobs? Are there any other parameters need to be set,
> and
> > > the
> > > > > > issue of a consumer being stuck is caused by misconfiguration?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I can see there are a lot of the same issues have been raised
> > > regarding
> > > > > > "the consumer is stuck" and usually, the answer has been "yeah,
> > > that's
> > > > > > because you have a long-running job, etc.". I have seen different
> > > > > > suggestions:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Avoid using long-running jobs. Read the message, submit it into
> > > > another
> > > > > > thread and let the consumer to pass. Obviously this can cause
> data
> > > loss
> > > > > and
> > > > > > it would be a difficult problem to handle. It might be better to
> > > avoid
> > > > > > using Kafka in the first place for these types of requests.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Avoid using apache Kafka for long-running requests
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Workaround based approaches like if the consumer is blocked,
> try
> > to
> > > > use
> > > > > > another consumer group and set the offset to the current value
> for
> > > the
> > > > > new
> > > > > > consumer group, etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There might be other suggestions I have missed here, but that is
> > not
> > > > the
> > > > > > point of this email. What I am looking for is what is the best
> > > practice
> > > > > for
> > > > > > dealing with long-running jobs with Apache Kafka. I cannot easily
> > > avoid
> > > > > > using Kafka because it plays a critical part in our application
> and
> > > > data
> > > > > > pipeline. On the other side, we have had so many challenges to
> keep
> > > the
> > > > > > long-running jobs stable operationally. So I would appreciate it
> if
> > > > > someone
> > > > > > can help me to understand what approach can be taken to deal with
> > > these
> > > > > > jobs with Apache Kafka as a message broker.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Ali
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > A.Nazemian
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > A.Nazemian
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> A.Nazemian
>

Reply via email to