junrao commented on code in PR #14242: URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14242#discussion_r1373536630
########## storage/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/storage/internals/epoch/LeaderEpochFileCache.java: ########## @@ -308,7 +308,14 @@ public void truncateFromEnd(long endOffset) { if (endOffset >= 0 && epochEntry.isPresent() && epochEntry.get().startOffset >= endOffset) { List<EpochEntry> removedEntries = removeFromEnd(x -> x.startOffset >= endOffset); - flush(); + // We intentionally don't force flushing change to the device here because: + // - To avoid fsync latency + // * fsync latency could be huge on a disk glitch, which is not rare in spinning drives + // * This method is called by ReplicaFetcher threads, which could block replica fetching + // then causing ISR shrink or high produce response time degradation in remote scope on high fsync latency. + // - Even when stale epochs remained in LeaderEpoch file due to the unclean shutdown, it will be handled by + // another truncateFromEnd call on log loading procedure so it won't be a problem + flush(false); Review Comment: > If we don't call flush here, some entries will remain in the file even after the log truncation. That's true. But if we write the new content to the file without flushing, it seems that those old entries could still exist in the file? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscr...@kafka.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org