Sean McNealy created SAMZA-2308:
-----------------------------------

             Summary: AsyncRunLoop and TieredPriorityChooser fail to be used 
together
                 Key: SAMZA-2308
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-2308
             Project: Samza
          Issue Type: Bug
          Components: container
    Affects Versions: 0.13.1, 0.14.0
            Reporter: Sean McNealy


In the single threaded run loop, a message envelop was replaced using the 
"tryUpdate(ssp)" function each time before calling ".choose()".

In the AsyncRunLoop that replacement is delayed until the callback completes. 
This allows choosing more messages to schedule to tasks which keeps threads 
busy and allows for scheduling lower priority messages when partitions are 
available. Good things when threads are available. When a message is chosen for 
an already processing partition it is added to the task's pendingEnvelopeQueue 
so that the run loop can choose yet more messages. But the 
TieredPriorityChooser may respond with a lower priority message for a 
SystemStreamPartition that is lower than another nonempty SystemStreamPartition 
since there is no way to exclude a partition or priority level from the 
".choose()" operation.

In fact, the Chooser object can be frequently exhausted of all messages. What 
happens is that for a partition, one messages from every SystemStream that is 
not empty will be in the FIFO/ArrayDeque pendingEnvelopeQueue which doesn't 
respect the set priority settings, so we just devolve to a round robin policy.

To reproduce, run a job with the following setting:
task.inputs=kafka.high-priority,kafka.low-priority
job.container.thread.pool.size=2
systems.kafka.streams.high-priority.samza.priority=1

Expected behavior:
Each partition will fully read the high-priority stream before reading messages 
from the low-priority stream.

Observed behavior:
Each partition reads from both streams as in a round robin policy.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)

Reply via email to