Now, the number of topics on ZK(/brokers/topics) is above 1000.
And I find that if I delete some topics, the time of producer blocking would be 
less.And the more of the connections with zk, the more time of block. 
----- Original Message -----
From: Jun Rao <[email protected]>
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Re: a problem with producer(it block for some minutes)
Date: 2012-08-31 22:09

Sounds like a ZK connection problem. Can you do any reads/writes in ZK
shell after connection?
Thanks,
Jun
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:40 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks to Jun Rao.Using a ZK shell to connect to ZK is no problem.Today, I
> use kafka-console-producer.sh to test, it also very slow at begin. It block
> for some minute before can send message.The log with
>  kafka-console-producer.sh is blow:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jun Rao <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected], [email protected]
> Subject: Re: a problem with producer(it block for some minutes)
> Date: 2012-08-31 12:56
>
> Could you try connecting ZK from a ZK shell and see if there is a
> connection issue?
> Thanks,
> Jun
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 4:19 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  Hi,all
> >         I meet a problem with producer. When the producer client is
> > initializing, it block for some minutes.    I find it block at "producer
> =
> > new Producer<String, String>(config)".   Is it the problem of zookeeper?
> I
> > think so. But I could not find what wrong with it.    The cluster is an
> > zookeeper and four brokers.   At the begin, the cluster work well. The
> > producer client and consumer client work well too.     But now, the
> > initialization of producer client is very slow, it block at "producer =
> new
> > Producer<String, String>(config)"      for some minutes. When the
> > connection has finished, it work well.       The consumer client work
> well
> > now. It has not occured block when initializing.  I use the kafka 0.7.1.
>  I
> > want to know what is the reason. How can I resolve it?        Thanks.
>

Reply via email to