[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7728?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Boyang Chen resolved KAFKA-7728.
--------------------------------
Resolution: Won't Fix
This is no longer a critical fix to the static membership, as leader rejoin
with no member info won't trigger rebalance in the original implementation.
> Add JoinReason to the join group request for better rebalance handling
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-7728
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7728
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Boyang Chen
> Assignee: Mayuresh Gharat
> Priority: Major
> Labels: consumer, mirror-maker, needs-kip
>
> Recently [~mgharat] and I discussed about the current rebalance logic on
> leader join group request handling. So far we blindly trigger rebalance when
> the leader rejoins. The caveat is that KIP-345 is not covering this effort
> and if a consumer group is not using sticky assignment but using other
> strategy like round robin, the redundant rebalance could still shuffle the
> topic partitions around consumers. (for example mirror maker application)
> I checked on broker side and here is what we currently do:
>
> {code:java}
> if (group.isLeader(memberId) || !member.matches(protocols))
> // force a rebalance if a member has changed metadata or if the leader sends
> JoinGroup.
> // The latter allows the leader to trigger rebalances for changes affecting
> assignment
> // which do not affect the member metadata (such as topic metadata changes
> for the consumer) {code}
> Based on the broker logic, we only need to trigger rebalance for leader
> rejoin when the topic metadata change has happened. I also looked up the
> ConsumerCoordinator code on client side, and found out the metadata
> monitoring logic here:
> {code:java}
> public boolean rejoinNeededOrPending() {
> ...
> // we need to rejoin if we performed the assignment and metadata has changed
> if (assignmentSnapshot != null &&
> !assignmentSnapshot.equals(metadataSnapshot))
> return true;
> }{code}
> I guess instead of just returning true, we could introduce a new enum field
> called JoinReason which could indicate the purpose of the rejoin. Thus we
> don't need to do a full rebalance when the leader is just in rolling bounce.
> We could utilize this information I guess. Just add another enum field into
> the join group request called JoinReason so that we know whether leader is
> rejoining due to topic metadata change. If yes, we trigger rebalance
> obviously; if no, we shouldn't trigger rebalance.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
