Hey Dan,

Your analysis looks right. I do see TODO item there to implement the
rebalance callback. Would you like to create a jira issue and work on that?

Thanks,
P

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 12:11 PM Dan S <danielms...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Philip,
>
> Thanks for the quick reply. Yes, it's the MockConsumer, but in our case
> we're calling the variant of subscribe that takes a custom
> ConsumerRebalanceListener(which among other things logs when it's called),
> and we're then calling rebalance (to simulate a rebalance) and removing all
> partitions from the consumer, polling a few times, and then adding them
> back. We're noticing our custom listener is never called, which was
> unexpected, but based on the code analysis in the original email seems to
> be the current implementation. The question is whether this is indeed
> desired behavior.
>
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 18:17 Philip Nee <philip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey Dan,
> >
> > Thanks for looking into this. Are you talking about MockConsumer?  If you
> > invoke subscribe(Collection<String> topics), it actually registers a Noop
> > callback. Perhaps this is what you are seeing?
> >
> > P
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 11:11 AM Dan S <danielms...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > It seems to me based on reading the code, that the consumer rebalance
> > > listener that is passed into the mock consumer when subscribing to a
> > topic
> > > is not actually called when a rebalance is simulated. My understanding
> is
> > > that the consumer rebalance listener is called from the consumer
> > > coordinator, which is called by kafka consumer. The mock consumer
> doesn't
> > > seem to use the consumer coordinator or use any other mechanism to call
> > the
> > > consumer rebalance listener. Is my understanding correct? Would it make
> > > sense to trigger the consumer rebalance listener when rebalance is
> > called?
> > >
> > > I would be willing to try to make the patch if the behavior is indeed
> > > currently incorrect/incomplete.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to