abhishekrb19 commented on code in PR #14292:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/14292#discussion_r1198412627
##########
indexing-service/src/main/java/org/apache/druid/indexing/seekablestream/supervisor/SeekableStreamSupervisor.java:
##########
@@ -4220,6 +4220,18 @@ protected void emitLag()
return;
}
+ // Try emitting lag even with stale metrics provided that none of the
partitions has negative lag
+ final boolean areOffsetsStale =
+ sequenceLastUpdated != null
+ && sequenceLastUpdated.getMillis()
+ < System.currentTimeMillis() -
tuningConfig.getOffsetFetchPeriod().getMillis();
+ if (areOffsetsStale && partitionLags.values().stream().anyMatch(x -> x
< 0)) {
+ log.warn("Lag is negative and will not be emitted because topic
offsets have become stale. "
Review Comment:
For troubleshooting, I think it'll also be good to log the topic:partition
info where the offsets may potentially be stale
##########
indexing-service/src/main/java/org/apache/druid/indexing/seekablestream/supervisor/SeekableStreamSupervisor.java:
##########
@@ -4220,6 +4220,18 @@ protected void emitLag()
return;
}
+ // Try emitting lag even with stale metrics provided that none of the
partitions has negative lag
Review Comment:
```suggestion
// Try emitting lag even with stale metrics provided that none of
the partitions have negative lag
```
##########
indexing-service/src/main/java/org/apache/druid/indexing/seekablestream/supervisor/SeekableStreamSupervisor.java:
##########
@@ -4220,6 +4220,18 @@ protected void emitLag()
return;
}
+ // Try emitting lag even with stale metrics provided that none of the
partitions has negative lag
+ final boolean areOffsetsStale =
+ sequenceLastUpdated != null
+ && sequenceLastUpdated.getMillis()
+ < System.currentTimeMillis() -
tuningConfig.getOffsetFetchPeriod().getMillis();
+ if (areOffsetsStale && partitionLags.values().stream().anyMatch(x -> x
< 0)) {
+ log.warn("Lag is negative and will not be emitted because topic
offsets have become stale. "
+ + "This will not impact data processing. "
+ + "Offsets may become stale because of connectivity
issues.");
+ return;
Review Comment:
Should we skip emitting lag metrics only for the stale partitions? I think
in general, it'll be helpful to emit metrics for partitions that have non-zero
lag. For example, if a topic's partitions are spread across multiple brokers
and only some have connectivity issues. Or for a topic where some partitions
receive little to no data, those may selectively be considered "stale".
--
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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
