[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3514?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16622939#comment-16622939
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on KAFKA-3514:
---------------------------------------

guozhangwang opened a new pull request #5669: KAFKA-3514: Modify pause logic if 
we being enforced processing
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5669
 
 
   1. When we are being enforced processing (idleStartTime is not UNKNOWN), we 
will only resume a partition if it is drained empty, instead of below the 
max.partition buffer.
   
   2. Related upgrade docs, and unit tests.
   
   ### Committer Checklist (excluded from commit message)
   - [ ] Verify design and implementation 
   - [ ] Verify test coverage and CI build status
   - [ ] Verify documentation (including upgrade notes)
   

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


> Stream timestamp computation needs some further thoughts
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: KAFKA-3514
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3514
>             Project: Kafka
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: streams
>            Reporter: Guozhang Wang
>            Assignee: Guozhang Wang
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: architecture, kip
>             Fix For: 2.1.0
>
>
> KIP-353: 
> [https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-353%3A+Improve+Kafka+Streams+Timestamp+Synchronization]
> Our current stream task's timestamp is used for punctuate function as well as 
> selecting which stream to process next (i.e. best effort stream 
> synchronization). And it is defined as the smallest timestamp over all 
> partitions in the task's partition group. This results in two unintuitive 
> corner cases:
> 1) observing a late arrived record would keep that stream's timestamp low for 
> a period of time, and hence keep being process until that late record. For 
> example take two partitions within the same task annotated by their 
> timestamps:
> {code:java}
> Stream A: 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1, 10
> {code}
> {code:java}
> Stream B: 2, 3, 4, 5
> {code}
> The late arrived record with timestamp "1" will cause stream A to be selected 
> continuously in the thread loop, i.e. messages with timestamp 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 
> until the record itself is dequeued and processed, then stream B will be 
> selected starting with timestamp 2.
> 2) an empty buffered partition will cause its timestamp to be not advanced, 
> and hence the task timestamp as well since it is the smallest among all 
> partitions. This may not be a severe problem compared with 1) above though.
> *Update*
> There is one more thing to consider (full discussion found here: 
> [http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1iKZJN1yz0E5?subj=Order+of+punctuate+and+process+in+a+stream+processor])
> {quote}Let's assume the following case.
>  - a stream processor that uses the Processor API
>  - context.schedule(1000) is called in the init()
>  - the processor reads only one topic that has one partition
>  - using custom timestamp extractor, but that timestamp is just a wall
>  clock time
>  Image the following events:
>  1., for 10 seconds I send in 5 messages / second
>  2., does not send any messages for 3 seconds
>  3., starts the 5 messages / second again
> I see that punctuate() is not called during the 3 seconds when I do not 
>  send any messages. This is ok according to the documentation, because 
>  there is not any new messages to trigger the punctuate() call. When the 
>  first few messages arrives after a restart the sending (point 3. above) I 
>  see the following sequence of method calls:
> 1., process() on the 1st message
>  2., punctuate() is called 3 times
>  3., process() on the 2nd message
>  4., process() on each following message
> What I would expect instead is that punctuate() is called first and then 
>  process() is called on the messages, because the first message's timestamp 
>  is already 3 seconds older then the last punctuate() was called, so the 
>  first message belongs after the 3 punctuate() calls.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to