[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-4767?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15869240#comment-15869240
]
Buğra Gedik commented on KAFKA-4767:
------------------------------------
IMO:
* An interrupt means immediate exit from whatever you are doing, whereas the
regular {{close}} flow can take up to {{timeout}}. So the two are different
scenarios. That's why I thought interrupting the IO thread was needed in this
case.
* Join should not be left incomplete just because we were asked to be
interrupted.
* The interrupt status of the original thread should be restored.
> KafkaProducer is not joining its IO thread properly
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-4767
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-4767
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: producer
> Affects Versions: 0.11.0.0
> Reporter: Buğra Gedik
> Priority: Minor
>
> The {{KafkaProducer}} is not properly joining the thread it creates. The code
> is like this:
> {code}
> try {
> this.ioThread.join(timeUnit.toMillis(timeout));
> } catch (InterruptedException t) {
> firstException.compareAndSet(null, t);
> log.error("Interrupted while joining ioThread", t);
> }
> {code}
> If the code is interrupted while performing the join, it will end up leaving
> the io thread running. The correct way of handling this is a follows:
> {code}
> try {
> this.ioThread.join(timeUnit.toMillis(timeout));
> } catch (InterruptedException t) {
> // propagate the interrupt
> this.ioThread.interrupt();
> try {
> this.ioThread.join();
> } catch (InterruptedException t) {
> firstException.compareAndSet(null, t);
> log.error("Interrupted while joining ioThread", t);
> } finally {
> // make sure we maintain the interrupted status
> Thread.currentThread.interrupt();
> }
> }
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
