Yeah, that's the idea. Here's the JIRA I was thinking of:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-2273. I'm guessing this will
need a KIP after 0.10 is out.

-Jason

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Jason,
>
> Can you link to the proposal so I can take a look? Would the "sticky"
> proposal prefer to keep partitions assigned to consumers who currently have
> them and have not failed?
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey Michael,
> >
> > I don't think a policy of retrying indefinitely is generally possible
> with
> > the new consumer even if you had a heartbeat API. The problem is that the
> > consumer itself doesn't control when the group needs to rebalance. If
> > another consumer joins or leaves the group, then all consumers will need
> to
> > rebalance, regardless whether they are in the middle of message
> processing
> > or not. Once the rebalance completes, the consumer may or may not get
> > assigned the same partition that the message came from. That said, if a
> > rebalance is unlikely because the group is stable, then you could use the
> > pause() API to move the message processing to a background thread. What
> > this would look like is basically this:
> >
> > 1. Receive message from poll() from partition 0.
> > 2. Pause partition 0 using pause().
> > 3. Send the message to a background thread for processing and continue
> > calling poll().
> > 4. When the processing finishes, resume() the partition.
> > 5. If the group rebalances before processing finishes, there are two
> cases:
> >   a) if partition 0 is reassigned, pause() it again in the
> > onPartitionsAssigned() callback (and you may also want to verify that the
> > last committed offset is still what you expect)
> >   b) otherwise, abort the background processing thread.
> >
> > Would that work for your case? It's also worth mentioning that there's a
> > proposal to add a sticky partition assignor to Kafka, which would make
> 5.b
> > less likely.
> >
> > -Jason
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 1:03 AM, Michael Freeman <mikfree...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Christian,
> > >                               Sending a heartbeat without having to
> poll
> > > would also be useful when using a large max.partition.fetch.bytes.
> > >
> > > For now I'm just going to shut the consumer down and restart after x
> > > period of time.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your insights.
> > >
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > > On 10 Mar 2016, at 18:33, Christian Posta <christian.po...@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yah that's a good point. That was brought up in another thread.
> > > >
> > > > The granularity of what poll() needs to be addressed. It tries to do
> > too
> > > > many things at once, including heartbeating. Not so sure that's
> > entirely
> > > > necessary.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:40 AM, Michael Freeman <
> mikfree...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks Christian,
> > > >>                               We would want to retry indefinitely.
> Or
> > at
> > > >> least for say x minutes. If we don't poll how do we keep the heart
> > beat
> > > >> alive to Kafka. We never want to loose this message and only want to
> > > commit
> > > >> to Kafka when the message is in Mongo. That's either as a successful
> > > >> message in a collection or an unsuccessful message in an error
> > > collection.
> > > >>
> > > >> Right now I let the consumer die and don't create a new one for x
> > > minutes.
> > > >> This causes a lot of rebalancing.
> > > >>
> > > >> Michael
> > > >>
> > > >>>> On 9 Mar 2016, at 21:12, Christian Posta <
> christian.po...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So can you have to decide how long you're willing to "wait" for the
> > > mongo
> > > >>> db to come back, and what you'd like to do with that message. So
> for
> > > >>> example, do you just retry inserting to Mongo for a predefined
> period
> > > of
> > > >>> time? Do you try forever? If you try forever, are you okay with the
> > > >>> consumer threads blocking indefinitely? Or maybe you implement a
> > > "circuit
> > > >>> breaker" to shed load to mongo? Or are you willing to stash the
> > message
> > > >>> into a DLQ and move on and try the next message?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> You don't need to "re-consume" the message do you? Can you just
> retry
> > > >>> and/or backoff-retry with the message you have? And just do the
> > > "commit"
> > > >> of
> > > >>> the offset if successfully?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Michael Freeman <
> > mikfree...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Hey,
> > > >>>>      My team is new to Kafka and we are using the examples found
> at.
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://www.confluent.io/blog/tutorial-getting-started-with-the-new-apache-kafka-0.9-consumer-client
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> We process messages from kafka and persist them to Mongo.
> > > >>>> If Mongo is unavailable we are wondering how we can re-consume the
> > > >> messages
> > > >>>> while we wait for Mongo to come back up.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Right now we commit after the messages for each partition are
> > > processed
> > > >>>> (Following the example).
> > > >>>> I have tried a few approaches.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> 1. Catch the application exception and skip the kafka commit.
> > However
> > > >> the
> > > >>>> next poll does not re consume the messages.
> > > >>>> 2. Allow the consumer to fail and restart the consumer. This works
> > but
> > > >>>> causes a rebalance.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Should I attempt to store the offset and parition (in memory)
> > instead
> > > >> and
> > > >>>> attempt to reseek in order to re consume the messages?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Whats the best practice approach in this kind of situation? My
> > > priority
> > > >> is
> > > >>>> to never loose a message and to ensure it makes it to Mongo.
> > > >> (Redelivery is
> > > >>>> ok)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks for any help or pointers in the right direction.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Michael
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> *Christian Posta*
> > > >>> twitter: @christianposta
> > > >>> http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> > > >>> http://fabric8.io
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Christian Posta*
> > > > twitter: @christianposta
> > > > http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> > > > http://fabric8.io
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Christian Posta*
> twitter: @christianposta
> http://www.christianposta.com/blog
> http://fabric8.io
>

Reply via email to