Which driver is used yo produce these messages ?

On Oct 26, 2017 07:11, "Dan Markhasin" <minimi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> No, that flag doesn't affect which offsets are returned, only executes the
> action (and resets the consumer to latest offset when used, regardless of
> datetime value I provide).
>
> On 25 October 2017 at 23:44, Hans Jespersen <h...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > I think you are just missing the —execute flag.
> >
> > -hans
> >
> > > On Oct 25, 2017, at 1:24 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I wonder if you have hit KAFKA-5600.
> > >
> > > Is it possible that you try out 0.11.0.1 ?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Dan Markhasin <minimi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I am using 0.11.0.0.
> > >>
> > >> There is no difference configuration-wise - both have 10 partitions
> and
> > 2
> > >> replicas. There are no errors in the logs, but looking in the data
> > folder
> > >> it seems like Kafka is not updating the timeindex file for data1_log -
> > >> notice how the timeindex file for the current log segment is not being
> > >> updated.
> > >>
> > >> bash-4.2$ pwd
> > >> /kafka/data/data1_log-1
> > >> bash-4.2$ ls -ltr | tail
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it 1073731573 Oct 25 01:21
> 00000000000337554984.log
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it     943616 Oct 25 01:21
> > 00000000000337554984.index
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it 1073734199 Oct 25 13:38
> 00000000000339816017.log
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it   10485756 Oct 25 13:38
> > >> 00000000000341934289.timeindex
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it         10 Oct 25 13:38
> > >> 00000000000341934289.snapshot
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it          0 Oct 25 13:38
> > >> 00000000000339816017.timeindex
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it     566712 Oct 25 13:38
> > 00000000000339816017.index
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it         17 Oct 25 20:23
> leader-epoch-checkpoint
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it   10485760 Oct 25 23:03
> > 00000000000341934289.index
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it  461590419 Oct 25 23:04
> 00000000000341934289.log
> > >>
> > >> For comparison, the beats topic:
> > >>
> > >> bash-4.2$ cd ../beats-1
> > >> bash-4.2$ ls -ltr
> > >> total 3212088
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it         17 Oct 25 00:23
> leader-epoch-checkpoint
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it         10 Oct 25 20:04
> > >> 00000000000188672034.snapshot
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it    2773008 Oct 25 20:04
> > >> 00000000000185224087.timeindex
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it 1073741779 Oct 25 20:04
> 00000000000185224087.log
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it    1967440 Oct 25 20:04
> > 00000000000185224087.index
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it   10485760 Oct 25 23:03
> > 00000000000188672034.index
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it   10485756 Oct 25 23:04
> > >> 00000000000188672034.timeindex
> > >> -rw-rw-r-- 1 ibiuser it   50166645 Oct 25 23:04
> 00000000000188672034.log
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> To give some context to why I'm even trying to reset the offsets, we
> had
> > >> encountered a strange situation earlier today:
> > >>
> > >> 1) One of the brokers had a hardware failure, and had to be rebuilt
> from
> > >> scratch (data partition was gone)
> > >> 2) When it went down, we noticed a spike in lag in one particular
> > consumer
> > >> group - it seems to have reset its offset to an earlier point in time
> > (but
> > >> not the earliest offset of the topic); I have read other messages on
> > this
> > >> mailing list of users who experienced the same behavior with 0.11.0.0
> > >> 3) The broker was reinstalled and rejoined the cluster with the same
> > >> broker.id (but with no data on it) - it rebalanced and eventually all
> > >> replicas became synced and the cluster was functioning normally.
> > >> 4) I then decided to bounce the same broker again to see if I can
> > reproduce
> > >> the issue I saw in #2 - and as soon as the broker was restarted, the
> > exact
> > >> same consumer group had its offset reset again and was lagging with
> > >> millions of records behind the current offset.
> > >> 5) I then tried to manually reset the consumer group's offset to a few
> > >> minutes before I restarted the broker, only to discover this strange
> > >> behavior where no matter which datetime value I provided, it kept
> > resetting
> > >> to the latest offset.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On 25 October 2017 at 22:48, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Do you mind providing a bit more information ?
> > >>>
> > >>> Release of Kafka you use
> > >>>
> > >>> Any difference between data1_log and the other, normal topic ?
> > >>>
> > >>> Probably check the broker log where data1_log is hosted - see if
> there
> > is
> > >>> some clue.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Dan Markhasin <minimi...@gmail.com
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I'm trying to use the kafka-consumer-groups.sh tool in order to
> rewind
> > >> a
> > >>>> consumer group's offset, however it seems to be returning the latest
> > >>> offset
> > >>>> regarding of the requested offset.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You can see in the below example that two consecutive commands to
> > reset
> > >>> the
> > >>>> offset to a specific point in time return different (increasing)
> > >> offsets,
> > >>>> which are actually the latest offsets for the topic.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - The consumer group ("test_consumer") is a console consumer that
> was
> > >>>> started with --from-beginning and terminated after a few seconds,
> just
> > >>>> enough for it to commit its offsets.
> > >>>> - The topic data1_log is very busy with thousands of incoming
> messages
> > >>> per
> > >>>> second
> > >>>> - The datetime value provided is approx. 5 hours earlier than the
> > >> current
> > >>>> UTC time
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [admin@broker01] ~> /kafka/latest/bin/kafka-consumer-groups.sh
> > >>>> --bootstrap-server localhost:9092 --reset-offsets --group
> > test_consumer
> > >>>> --topic data1_log --to-datetime '2017-10-25T13:40:00.000'
> > >>>> Note: This will only show information about consumers that use the
> > Java
> > >>>> consumer API (non-ZooKeeper-based consumers).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> TOPIC                          PARTITION  NEW-OFFSET
> > >>>> data1_log                      8          301485420
> > >>>> data1_log                      1          342788637
> > >>>> data1_log                      7          287621428
> > >>>> data1_log                      3          268612266
> > >>>> data1_log                      0          201860717
> > >>>> data1_log                      9          202749553
> > >>>> data1_log                      4          188974032
> > >>>> data1_log                      6          234308481
> > >>>> data1_log                      2          263507741
> > >>>> data1_log                      5          232707238
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [admin@broker01] ~> /kafka/latest/bin/kafka-consumer-groups.sh
> > >>>> --bootstrap-server localhost:9092 --reset-offsets --group
> > test_consumer
> > >>>> --topic data1_log --to-datetime '2017-10-25T13:40:00.000'
> > >>>> Note: This will only show information about consumers that use the
> > Java
> > >>>> consumer API (non-ZooKeeper-based consumers).
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> TOPIC                          PARTITION  NEW-OFFSET
> > >>>> data1_log                      8          301485491
> > >>>> data1_log                      1          342788779
> > >>>> data1_log                      7          287621534
> > >>>> data1_log                      3          268612364
> > >>>> data1_log                      0          201860796
> > >>>> data1_log                      9          202749620
> > >>>> data1_log                      4          188974068
> > >>>> data1_log                      6          234308564
> > >>>> data1_log                      2          263507823
> > >>>> data1_log                      5          232707293
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This issue seems to be topic-specific - there is a different topic
> > >> (also
> > >>>> very active) where the same command consistently returns the correct
> > >>>> offsets fixed in the time for the requested datetime.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> What could be the issue here?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> Dan
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to