vvcephei commented on a change in pull request #9270:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/9270#discussion_r497818766
##########
File path: core/src/main/scala/kafka/coordinator/group/GroupCoordinator.scala
##########
@@ -1040,21 +1040,36 @@ class GroupCoordinator(val brokerId: Int,
group.currentState match {
case Stable =>
- info(s"Static member joins during Stable stage will not trigger
rebalance.")
- group.maybeInvokeJoinCallback(member, JoinGroupResult(
- members = List.empty,
- memberId = newMemberId,
- generationId = group.generationId,
- protocolType = group.protocolType,
- protocolName = group.protocolName,
- // We want to avoid current leader performing trivial assignment
while the group
- // is in stable stage, because the new assignment in leader's next
sync call
- // won't be broadcast by a stable group. This could be guaranteed by
- // always returning the old leader id so that the current leader
won't assume itself
- // as a leader based on the returned message, since the new
member.id won't match
- // returned leader id, therefore no assignment will be performed.
- leaderId = currentLeader,
- error = Errors.NONE))
+ // check if group's selectedProtocol of next generation will change,
if not, simply store group to persist the
+ // updated static member, if yes, rebalance should be triggered to let
the group's assignment and selectProtocol consistent
+ val selectedProtocolOfNextGeneration = group.selectProtocol
+ if (group.protocolName.contains(selectedProtocolOfNextGeneration)) {
+ info(s"Static member which joins during Stable stage and doesn't
affect selectProtocol will not trigger rebalance.")
+ val groupAssignment: Map[String, Array[Byte]] =
group.allMemberMetadata.map(member => member.memberId ->
member.assignment).toMap
+ groupManager.storeGroup(group, groupAssignment, error => {
+ group.inLock {
+ if (error != Errors.NONE) {
Review comment:
Hi @feyman2016 , I just noticed this PR. Thanks for picking this up!
I'm wondering something along similar lines; should we move the whole join
callback inside this block? It seems like that's the way we can delay the join
group response until after the update is actually persisted.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
