[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-305?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13236976#comment-13236976
]
Prashanth Menon commented on KAFKA-305:
---------------------------------------
Thanks for the input everyone. Regarding the ZK failure, that is effectively
the trace I'm seeing on my end as well - the log makes it clear that the
ephemeral nodes get deleted but the test still fails when creating them
afterwards.
I would like to delay commiting this patch, atleast for the weekend, as I'd
like to perform a little benchmark against a pure NIO implementation. The
benefits there would be having timeouts for both read and write operations and
a potential performance boost.
> SyncProducer does not correctly timeout
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-305
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-305
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 0.7, 0.8
> Reporter: Prashanth Menon
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: KAFKA-305-v1.patch, KAFKA-305-v2.patch
>
>
> So it turns out that using the channel in SyncProducer like we are to perform
> blocking reads will not trigger socket timeouts (though we set it) and will
> block forever which is bad. This bug identifies the issue:
> http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4614802 and this article
> presents a potential work-around:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2866557/timeout-for-socketchannel for
> workaround. The work-around is a simple solution that involves creating a
> separate ReadableByteChannel instance for timeout-enabled reads.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
