Hi,

1195725856 is a recognizable value, it's "GET " decoded as a integer.
So it looks like someone sent an HTTP GET request to your broker.

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 6:56 PM Malcolm McFarland <mmcfarl...@cavulus.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> It looks like you need to update your broker configuration to include a
> higher value for message.max.bytes.
>
> Hth,
> Malcolm McFarland
> Cavulus
>
>
> This correspondence is from HealthPlanCRM, LLC, d/b/a Cavulus. Any
> unauthorized or improper disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the
> contents of this message is prohibited. The information contained in this
> message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the
> recipient(s) named above. If you have received this message in error,
> please notify the sender immediately and delete the original message.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:51 AM roger <ro...@teamconcepts.us> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have received the following error (running kafka  v2.3.0):
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.InvalidReceiveException: Invalid receive
> > (size = 1195725856 larger than 1048576000)
> >
> > I've attached our configuration/properties, hope it helps.
> >
> > Here are the details:
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.InvalidReceiveException: Invalid receive
> > (size = 1195725856 larger than 1048576000)
> > at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.NetworkReceive.readFrom(NetworkReceive.java:104)
> > at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.KafkaChannel.receive(KafkaChannel.java:424)
> > at org.apache.kafka.common.network.KafkaChannel.read(KafkaChannel.java:385)
> > at org.apache.kafka.common.network.Selector.attemptRead(Selector.java:651)
> > at
> > org.apache.kafka.common.network.Selector.pollSelectionKeys(Selector.java:572)
> > at org.apache.kafka.common.network.Selector.poll(Selector.java:483)
> > at kafka.network.Processor.poll(SocketServer.scala:863)
> > at kafka.network.Processor.run(SocketServer.scala:762)
> > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
> >
> > Please help to see how can this be resolved.
> > Many Thanks!!
> >
> > Roger
> >
> >
> >

Reply via email to