[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-9987?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17107584#comment-17107584
 ] 

Hai Lin commented on KAFKA-9987:
--------------------------------

Thanks for putting this up. From the above algorithm, looks like we will 
introduce a cap per of partition assigned per rebalance. Can you hight light a 
bit the difference from existing algorithm, the only difference is the new C_f 
and C_c? So the existing one will assign everything to fill up all 
unfilled_members and all partitions right?

Also what's the time frame looks like for the implementation? Will it come with 
some benchmark to evaluate the performance with large consumer group(> 2k)? 
Will it come to 2.4 as a minor release? The reason we want it to upgrade from 
2.2 to 2.4 is to get a better performance for large consumer group(> 2k), and 
this(stableness of large consumer group) is been a pain point for us for a 
while.

 

> Improve sticky partition assignor algorithm
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: KAFKA-9987
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-9987
>             Project: Kafka
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: clients
>            Reporter: Sophie Blee-Goldman
>            Assignee: Sophie Blee-Goldman
>            Priority: Major
>
> In 
> [KIP-429|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-429%3A+Kafka+Consumer+Incremental+Rebalance+Protocol]
>  we added the new CooperativeStickyAssignor which leverages on the underlying 
> sticky assignment algorithm of the existing StickyAssignor (moved to 
> AbstractStickyAssignor). The algorithm is fairly complex as it tries to 
> optimize stickiness while satisfying perfect balance _in the case individual 
> consumers may be subscribed to different subsets of the topics._ While it 
> does a pretty good job at what it promises to do, it doesn't scale well with 
> large numbers of consumers and partitions.
> To give a concrete example, users have reported that it takes 2.5 minutes for 
> the assignment to complete with just 2100 consumers reading from 2100 
> partitions. Since partitions revoked during the first of two cooperative 
> rebalances will remain unassigned until the end of the second rebalance, it's 
> important for the rebalance to be as fast as possible. And since one of the 
> primary improvements of the cooperative rebalancing protocol is better 
> scaling experience, the only OOTB cooperative assignor should not itself 
> scale poorly
> If we can constrain the problem a bit, we can simplify the algorithm greatly. 
> In many cases the individual consumers won't be subscribed to some random 
> subset of the total subscription, they will all be subscribed to the same set 
> of topics and rely on the assignor to balance the partition workload.
> We can detect this case by checking the group's individual subscriptions and 
> call on a more efficient assignment algorithm. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to