Thank you! Will take a look at the PR.
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 11:56 PM Erik van Oosten
wrote:
> Thanks!
>
> Here is Tom Lee's PR recreated on trunk:
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/13678
>
> I believe that this PR might not be complete though. When we only call
> commitAsync (repeatedly)
Thanks!
Here is Tom Lee's PR recreated on trunk:
https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/13678
I believe that this PR might not be complete though. When we only call
commitAsync (repeatedly) from the rebalance listener callback method.
Will the client's poll method ever be invoked? I suspect
Hey Eric,
Maybe its more straightforward to open a new PR.
Thanks!
P
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 9:36 AM Erik van Oosten wrote:
> If I were to rebase the old pull request and re-open KAFKA-10337, would
> it be considered for merging?
>
> Kind regards,
> Erik.
>
>
> Op 03-05-2023 om 09:21
If I were to rebase the old pull request and re-open KAFKA-10337, would
it be considered for merging?
Kind regards,
Erik.
Op 03-05-2023 om 09:21 schreef Erik van Oosten:
Hi Philip,
Firstly, could you explain the situation
in that you would prefer to invoke commitAsync over commitSync
Hi Philip,
Firstly, could you explain the situation
in that you would prefer to invoke commitAsync over commitSync in the
rebalance listener?
Of course!
Short answer: we prefer commitAsync because we want to handle multiple
partitions concurrently using the ZIO runtime.
Long answer: this
Sorry - I dug a bit into the old PR. Seems like the issue is there's broken
contract that if the commitSync won't wait for the previous async commits
to complete if it tries to commit an empty offset map.
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:49 PM Philip Nee wrote:
> Hey Erik,
>
> Just a couple of
Hey Erik,
Just a couple of questions to you: Firstly, could you explain the situation
in that you would prefer to invoke commitAsync over commitSync in the
rebalance listener? Typically we would use the synchronized method to
ensure the commits are completed before moving on with the
Dear developers of the Kafka java client,
It seems I have found a feature gap in the Kafka java client.
KAFKA-10337 and its associated pull request on Github (from 2020!) would
solve this, but it was closed without merging. We would love to see it
being reconsidered for merging. This mail has