showuon commented on a change in pull request #10985:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10985#discussion_r665772469



##########
File path: 
clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/internals/AbstractStickyAssignor.java
##########
@@ -238,32 +272,50 @@ private boolean allSubscriptionsEqual(Set<String> 
allTopics,
         Iterator<String> unfilledConsumerIter = unfilledMembers.iterator();
         // Round-Robin filling remaining members up to the expected numbers of 
maxQuota, otherwise, to minQuota
         for (TopicPartition unassignedPartition : unassignedPartitions) {
-            if (!unfilledConsumerIter.hasNext()) {
-                if (unfilledMembers.isEmpty()) {
-                    // Should not enter here since we have calculated the 
exact number to assign to each consumer
-                    // There might be issues in the assigning algorithm, or 
maybe assigning the same partition to two owners.
+            String consumer;
+            if (unfilledConsumerIter.hasNext()) {
+                consumer = unfilledConsumerIter.next();
+            } else {
+                if (unfilledMembers.isEmpty() && 
potentiallyUnfilledMembersAtMinQuota.isEmpty()) {
+                    // Should not enter here since we have calculated the 
exact number to assign to each consumer.
+                    // This indicates issues in the assignment algorithm
                     int currentPartitionIndex = 
unassignedPartitions.indexOf(unassignedPartition);
                     log.error("No more unfilled consumers to be assigned. The 
remaining unassigned partitions are: {}",
-                        unassignedPartitions.subList(currentPartitionIndex, 
unassignedPartitions.size()));
+                              
unassignedPartitions.subList(currentPartitionIndex, 
unassignedPartitions.size()));
                     throw new IllegalStateException("No more unfilled 
consumers to be assigned.");
+                } else if (unfilledMembers.isEmpty()) {
+                    consumer = potentiallyUnfilledMembersAtMinQuota.poll();
+                } else {
+                    unfilledConsumerIter = unfilledMembers.iterator();
+                    consumer = unfilledConsumerIter.next();
                 }
-                unfilledConsumerIter = unfilledMembers.iterator();
             }
-            String consumer = unfilledConsumerIter.next();
+
             List<TopicPartition> consumerAssignment = assignment.get(consumer);
             consumerAssignment.add(unassignedPartition);
 
             // We already assigned all possible ownedPartitions, so we know 
this must be newly assigned to this consumer
-            if (allRevokedPartitions.contains(unassignedPartition))
+            // or else the partition was actually claimed by multiple previous 
owners and had to be invalidated from all
+            // members claimed ownedPartitions
+            if (allRevokedPartitions.contains(unassignedPartition) || 
partitionsWithMultiplePreviousOwners.contains(unassignedPartition))
                 partitionsTransferringOwnership.put(unassignedPartition, 
consumer);

Review comment:
       I'm thinking we can have a test for package scope 
`partitionsTransferringOwnership` in `AbstractStickyAssignorTest`.  I found we 
didn't test it before. We can verify the doubly assigned partitions and other 
revoked partitions are put into `partitionsTransferringOwnership` correctly.




-- 
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


Reply via email to