Re: Does Flink Kafka connector has max_pending_offsets concept?

2019-06-05 Thread xwang355
Elias Thanks for your reply. In this case, *When # of Kafka consumers = # of partitions, and I use setParallelism(>1), something like this 'messageSteam.rebalance().map(lamba).setParallelism(3).print()' * If checkpointing is enabled, I assume Flink will commit the offsets in the 'right order'

Re: Does Flink Kafka connector has max_pending_offsets concept?

2019-06-06 Thread xwang355
Thanks Fabian. This is really helpful. -- Sent from: http://apache-flink-user-mailing-list-archive.2336050.n4.nabble.com/

Re: Flink Kafka consumer with low latency requirement

2019-06-24 Thread xwang355
Fabian, Thank you for replying. If I understand your previous comment correctly, I setup up a consumer with parallelism 1 and connect a worker task with parallelism 2. If worker thread one is making a block call and stuck for 60s, the consumer thread should continue fetching from the partition

Re: Flink Kafka consumer with low latency requirement

2019-06-24 Thread xwang355
private static void doWork(long tid) throws InterruptedException { if (!sortedTid.contains(tid)) { sortedTid.add(tid); } // simulate a straggler, make the thread with the lowest tid a slow processor if

Re: Flink Kafka consumer with low latency requirement

2019-06-24 Thread xwang355
I posted my related observation here in a separated thread. http://apache-flink-user-mailing-list-archive.2336050.n4.nabble.com/Does-making-synchronize-call-might-choke-the-whole-pipeline-tc28383.html -- Sent from: http://apache-flink-user-mailing-list-archive.2336050.n4.nabble.com/