Don't you have the same problem using SimpleConsumer? How does another
process know a SimpleConsumer hangs?
Thanks,
Jun
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Srinivas Reddy Kancharla <
getre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Jun for your response.
> Here is my scenario:
>
> topicCountMap.put(topic, new
Thanks Jun for your response.
Here is my scenario:
topicCountMap.put(topic, new Integer(2));
Map>> consumerMap =
consumer.createMessageStreams(topicCountMap);
List> streams = consumerMap.get(topic);
So from above scenario (only 1 partition) , there will be 2 threads C1 and
C2, and one of the thre
If C1 dies, C2 will be owning that partition. However, C1 has to really
die, which typically means that either you close the consumer connector or
the jvm of C1 is gone.
In your case, it seems that C1 didn't die, it just hung. Do you know why C1
hung?
Thanks,
Jun
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:34 PM,
Hi,
Further I looked at this scenario, Is it correct that above scenario can be
handled if I use SimpleConsumer approach instead of using
"ConsumerConnector.createMessageStreams()" , this way I have better control
on partition. This way my partition is not bound with any specific consumer
thread.
Hi,
I have a scenario where I have 1 partition and 1 consumer group having 2
consumer threads running say C1 and C2. Since there is only one partition
for a given topic, say C1 is holding that partition. Now due to some reason
if C1 dies, can C2 get hold of that partition?
i.e. C1 was busy with K
