eolivelli commented on a change in pull request #13383: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/13383#discussion_r789632488
########## File path: pulsar-broker/src/test/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/BatchMessageWithBatchIndexLevelTest.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +/** + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ +package org.apache.pulsar.broker.service; + +import com.google.common.collect.Lists; +import lombok.SneakyThrows; +import org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers; +import org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentTopic; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.Message; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.MessageId; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.Producer; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.SubscriptionType; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.impl.ConsumerImpl; +import org.apache.pulsar.common.util.FutureUtil; +import org.awaitility.Awaitility; +import org.testng.annotations.BeforeClass; +import org.testng.annotations.Test; +import java.util.List; +import java.util.UUID; +import java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture; +import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; +import static org.testng.Assert.assertEquals; + +@Test(groups = "broker") +public class BatchMessageWithBatchIndexLevelTest extends BatchMessageTest { + + @BeforeClass + @Override + protected void setup() throws Exception { + conf.setAcknowledgmentAtBatchIndexLevelEnabled(true); + super.baseSetup(); + } + + @Test + @SneakyThrows + public void testBatchMessageAck() { + int numMsgs = 40; + final String topicName = "persistent://prop/ns-abc/batchMessageAck-" + UUID.randomUUID(); + final String subscriptionName = "sub-batch-1"; + + ConsumerImpl<byte[]> consumer = (ConsumerImpl<byte[]>) pulsarClient + .newConsumer() + .topic(topicName) + .subscriptionName(subscriptionName) + .receiverQueueSize(10) + .subscriptionType(SubscriptionType.Shared) + .enableBatchIndexAcknowledgment(true) + .negativeAckRedeliveryDelay(100, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) + .subscribe(); + + Producer<byte[]> producer = pulsarClient + .newProducer() + .topic(topicName) + .batchingMaxMessages(20) + .batchingMaxPublishDelay(200, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) + .enableBatching(true) + .create(); + + List<CompletableFuture<MessageId>> sendFutureList = Lists.newArrayList(); + for (int i = 0; i < numMsgs; i++) { + byte[] message = ("batch-message-" + i).getBytes(); + sendFutureList.add(producer.newMessage().value(message).sendAsync()); + } + FutureUtil.waitForAll(sendFutureList).get(); + PersistentTopic topic = (PersistentTopic) pulsar.getBrokerService().getTopicReference(topicName).get(); + PersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers dispatcher = (PersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers) topic + .getSubscription(subscriptionName).getDispatcher(); + Message<byte[]> receive1 = consumer.receive(); + Message<byte[]> receive2 = consumer.receive(); + consumer.acknowledge(receive1); + consumer.acknowledge(receive2); + Awaitility.await().untilAsserted(() -> { + assertEquals(dispatcher.getConsumers().get(0).getUnackedMessages(), 18); + }); + Message<byte[]> receive3 = consumer.receive(); + Message<byte[]> receive4 = consumer.receive(); + consumer.acknowledge(receive3); + consumer.acknowledge(receive4); + Awaitility.await().untilAsserted(() -> { + assertEquals(dispatcher.getConsumers().get(0).getUnackedMessages(), 16); + }); + Message<byte[]> receive5 = consumer.receive(); + consumer.negativeAcknowledge(receive5); + Awaitility.await().untilAsserted(() -> { + assertEquals(dispatcher.getConsumers().get(0).getUnackedMessages(), 16); Review comment: the value is already 16, so...what are we testing here ? ########## File path: pulsar-broker/src/test/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/BatchMessageWithBatchIndexLevelTest.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,104 @@ +/** + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, + * software distributed under the License is distributed on an + * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY + * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the + * specific language governing permissions and limitations + * under the License. + */ +package org.apache.pulsar.broker.service; + +import com.google.common.collect.Lists; +import lombok.SneakyThrows; +import org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherMultipleConsumers; +import org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentTopic; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.Message; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.MessageId; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.Producer; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.api.SubscriptionType; +import org.apache.pulsar.client.impl.ConsumerImpl; +import org.apache.pulsar.common.util.FutureUtil; +import org.awaitility.Awaitility; +import org.testng.annotations.BeforeClass; +import org.testng.annotations.Test; +import java.util.List; +import java.util.UUID; +import java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture; +import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; +import static org.testng.Assert.assertEquals; + +@Test(groups = "broker") +public class BatchMessageWithBatchIndexLevelTest extends BatchMessageTest { + + @BeforeClass + @Override + protected void setup() throws Exception { + conf.setAcknowledgmentAtBatchIndexLevelEnabled(true); + super.baseSetup(); + } + + @Test + @SneakyThrows + public void testBatchMessageAck() { + int numMsgs = 40; + final String topicName = "persistent://prop/ns-abc/batchMessageAck-" + UUID.randomUUID(); + final String subscriptionName = "sub-batch-1"; + + ConsumerImpl<byte[]> consumer = (ConsumerImpl<byte[]>) pulsarClient + .newConsumer() + .topic(topicName) + .subscriptionName(subscriptionName) + .receiverQueueSize(10) + .subscriptionType(SubscriptionType.Shared) + .enableBatchIndexAcknowledgment(true) + .negativeAckRedeliveryDelay(100, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) + .subscribe(); + + Producer<byte[]> producer = pulsarClient + .newProducer() + .topic(topicName) + .batchingMaxMessages(20) + .batchingMaxPublishDelay(200, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) Review comment: if you want to be sure that you have exactly 2 batches let's set a bigger timeout, like 1 hour. otherwise is the VM that executes the test is slow you could see different results ########## File path: pulsar-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/Consumer.java ########## @@ -489,6 +562,31 @@ private void checkCanRemovePendingAcksAndHandle(PositionImpl position, MessageId } } + private Consumer getAckOwnerConsumer(long ledgerId, long entryId) { + Consumer ackOwnerConsumer = this; + if (Subscription.isIndividualAckMode(subType)) { + for (Consumer consumer : subscription.getConsumers()) { + if (consumer != this && consumer.getPendingAcks().containsKey(ledgerId, entryId)) { + ackOwnerConsumer = consumer; + break; + } + } + } + return ackOwnerConsumer; + } + + private boolean isDeletionAtBatchIndexLevelEnabled() { + ServiceConfiguration configuration = subscription.getTopic().getBrokerService().getPulsar().getConfiguration(); Review comment: is it necessary to always call this chain of methods ? what about caching this value when we create this object ? ########## File path: pulsar-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/service/Consumer.java ########## @@ -811,8 +916,15 @@ public Subscription getSubscription() { } private int addAndGetUnAckedMsgs(Consumer consumer, int ackedMessages) { - subscription.addUnAckedMessages(ackedMessages); - return UNACKED_MESSAGES_UPDATER.addAndGet(consumer, ackedMessages); + int unackedMsgs = 0; + if (Subscription.isIndividualAckMode(subType)) { + subscription.addUnAckedMessages(ackedMessages); + unackedMsgs = UNACKED_MESSAGES_UPDATER.addAndGet(consumer, ackedMessages); + } + if (unackedMsgs < 0) { + log.error("unackedMsgs is : {}, ackedMessages : {}, consumer : {}", unackedMsgs, ackedMessages, consumer); Review comment: why don't we throw an error ? -- 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]
