[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5440?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16127637#comment-16127637
 ] 

Tommy Becker edited comment on KAFKA-5440 at 8/15/17 5:56 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

To answer my own question, from what I can tell the PR for KAFKA-5372 will 
solve this. It would be nice to get a backport to a patch release before 1.0.


was (Author: twbecker):
To answer my own question, from what I can tell the PR for KAFKA-5372 will 
solve this. It would be nice to get a backport to patch release before 1.0.

> Kafka Streams report state RUNNING even if all threads are dead
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: KAFKA-5440
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5440
>             Project: Kafka
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: streams
>    Affects Versions: 0.10.2.1, 0.11.0.0
>            Reporter: Matthias J. Sax
>
> From the mailing list:
> {quote}
> Hi All,
> We recently implemented a health check for a Kafka Streams based application. 
> The health check is simply checking the state of Kafka Streams by calling 
> KafkaStreams.state(). It reports healthy if it’s not in PENDING_SHUTDOWN or 
> NOT_RUNNING states. 
> We truly appreciate having the possibility to easily check the state of Kafka 
> Streams but to our surprise we noticed that KafkaStreams.state() returns 
> RUNNING even though all StreamThreads has crashed and reached NOT_RUNNING 
> state. Is this intended behaviour or is it a bug? Semantically it seems weird 
> to me that KafkaStreams would say it’s RUNNING when it is in fact not 
> consuming anything since all underlying working threads has crashed. 
> If this is intended behaviour I would appreciate an explanation of why that 
> is the case. Also in that case, how could I determine if the consumption from 
> Kafka hasn’t crashed? 
> If this is not intended behaviour, how fast could I expect it to be fixed? I 
> wouldn’t mind fixing it myself but I’m not sure if this is considered trivial 
> or big enough to require a JIRA. Also, if I would implement a fix I’d like 
> your input on what would be a reasonable solution. By just inspecting to code 
> I have an idea but I’m not sure I understand all the implication so I’d be 
> happy to hear your thoughts first. 
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to