Hi Tom,

Yes, the plan is to merge KAFKA-5028 first and then use a lock-free
approach for the new  metrics. I considered mentioning that in the KIP
given KAFKA-5120, but didn't in the end. I'll add it to make it clear.

Regarding locks, they are removed by KAFKA-5028, as you say. So, if I
understand correctly, you are suggesting an event processing rate metric
with event type as a tag? Onur and Jun, what do you think?

Ismael

On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Tom Crayford <tcrayf...@heroku.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We (Heroku) are very excited about this KIP, as we've struggled a bit with
> controller stability recently. Having these additional metrics would be
> wonderful.
>
> I'd like to ensure polling these metrics *doesn't* hold any locks etc,
> because, as noted in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5120,
> that
> lock can be held for quite some time. This may become not an issue as of
> KAFKA-5028 though.
>
> Lastly, I'd love to see some metrics around how long the controller spends
> inside its lock. We've been tracking an issue (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5116) where it can hold the
> lock for many, many minutes in a zk client listener thread when responding
> to a single request. I'm not sure how that plays into
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5028 (which I assume will land
> before this metrics patch), but it feels like there will be equivalent
> problems ("how long does it spend processing any individual message from
> the queue, broken down by message type").
>
> These are minor improvements though, the addition of more metrics to the
> controller is already going to be very helpful.
>
> Thanks
>
> Tom Crayford
> Heroku Kafka
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We've posted "KIP-143: Controller Health Metrics" for discussion:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > 143%3A+Controller+Health+Metrics
> >
> > Please take a look. Your feedback is appreciated.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ismael
> >
>

Reply via email to