Hi Chris,
As you said, the below message is coming when I call an abort if there is
an invalid record, then for the next transaction I can see the below
message and then the connector will be stopped.
2023-03-13 14:28:26,043 INFO [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0] Aborting
transaction for batch as requested by connector
(org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask)
[task-thread-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
2023-03-13 14:28:26,043 INFO [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0] [Producer
clientId=connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0] Aborting
incomplete transaction (org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.KafkaProducer)
[task-thread-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
The issue with InvalidProducerEpoch is happening when I call the commit if
there is an invalid record, and in the next transaction I am getting
InvalidProducerEpoch Exception and the messages are copied in the previous
email. I don't know if this will also be fixed by your bug fix.I am using
kafka 3.3.1 version as of now.
Thanks,
Nitty
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 10:47 AM NITTY BENNY <nittybe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> The below mentioned issue is happening for Json connector only. Is there
> any difference with asn1,binary,csv and json connector?
>
> Thanks,
> Nitty
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 9:16 AM NITTY BENNY <nittybe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> Sorry Chris, I am not able to reproduce the above issue.
>>
>> I want to share with you one more use case I found.
>> The use case is in the first batch it returns 2 valid records and then in
>> the next batch it is an invalid record.Below is the transaction_state
>> topic, when I call a commit while processing an invalid record.
>>
>> connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0::TransactionMetadata(transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> producerId=11, producerEpoch=2, txnTimeoutMs=60000, state=*Ongoing*,
>> pendingState=None, topicPartitions=HashSet(streams-input-2),
>> txnStartTimestamp=1678620463834, txnLastUpdateTimestamp=1678620463834)
>>
>> then after some time I saw the below states as well,
>>
>> connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0::TransactionMetadata(transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> producerId=11, producerEpoch=3, txnTimeoutMs=60000, state=*PrepareAbort*,
>> pendingState=None, topicPartitions=HashSet(streams-input-2),
>> txnStartTimestamp=1678620463834, txnLastUpdateTimestamp=1678620526119)
>> connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0::TransactionMetadata(transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> producerId=11, producerEpoch=3, txnTimeoutMs=60000, state=*CompleteAbort*,
>> pendingState=None, topicPartitions=HashSet(),
>> txnStartTimestamp=1678620463834, txnLastUpdateTimestamp=1678620526121)
>>
>> Later for the next transaction, when it returns the first batch below is
>> the logs I can see.
>>
>> Transiting to abortable error state due to
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.InvalidProducerEpochException: Producer
>> attempted to produce with an old epoch.
>> (org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.internals.TransactionManager)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,220 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask{id=json-sftp-source-connector-0} failed to send
>> record to streams-input:
>> (org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.AbstractWorkerSourceTask)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.InvalidProducerEpochException: Producer
>> attempted to produce with an old epoch.
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,222 INFO [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> [Producer clientId=connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0] Transiting to
>> fatal error state due to
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException: There is a newer
>> producer with the same transactionalId which fences the current one.
>> (org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.internals.TransactionManager)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,222 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> [Producer clientId=connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0] Aborting
>> producer batches due to fatal error
>> (org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.internals.Sender)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException: There is a newer
>> producer with the same transactionalId which fences the current one.
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,222 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask{id=json-sftp-source-connector-0} Failed to
>> flush offsets to storage:
>> (org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException: There is a newer
>> producer with the same transactionalId which fences the current one.
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,224 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask{id=json-sftp-source-connector-0} failed to send
>> record to streams-input:
>> (org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.AbstractWorkerSourceTask)
>> [kafka-producer-network-thread |
>> connector-producer-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException: There is a newer
>> producer with the same transactionalId which fences the current one.
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,222 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0|offsets]
>> ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask{id=json-sftp-source-connector-0} Failed to
>> commit producer transaction
>> (org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask)
>> [task-thread-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>> org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException: There is a newer
>> producer with the same transactionalId which fences the current one.
>> 2023-03-12 11:32:45,225 ERROR [json-sftp-source-connector|task-0]
>> ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask{id=json-sftp-source-connector-0} Task threw an
>> uncaught and unrecoverable exception. Task is being killed and will not
>> recover until manually restarted
>> (org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.WorkerTask)
>> [task-thread-json-sftp-source-connector-0]
>>
>> Do you know why it is showing an abort state even if I call commit?
>>
>> I tested one more scenario, When I call the commit I saw the below
>> connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0::TransactionMetadata(transactionalId=connect-cluster-json-sftp-source-connector-0,
>> producerId=11, producerEpoch=2, txnTimeoutMs=60000, state=*Ongoing*,
>> pendingState=None, topicPartitions=HashSet(streams-input-2),
>> txnStartTimestamp=1678620463834, txnLastUpdateTimestamp=1678620463834)
>> Then, before changing the states to Abort, I dropped the next file then I
>> dont see any issues. Previous transaction
>> as well as the current transaction are committed.
>>
>> Thank you for your support.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nitty
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 8:04 PM Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Nitty,
>>>
>>> > I called commitTransaction when I reach the first error record, but
>>> commit is not happening for me. Kafka connect tries to abort the
>>> transaction automatically
>>>
>>> This is really interesting--are you certain that your task never invoked
>>> TransactionContext::abortTransaction in this case? I'm looking over the
>>> code base and it seems fairly clear that the only thing that could
>>> trigger
>>> a call to KafkaProducer::abortTransaction is a request by the task to
>>> abort
>>> a transaction (either for a next batch, or for a specific record). It may
>>> help to run the connector in a debugger and/or look for "Aborting
>>> transaction for batch as requested by connector" or "Aborting transaction
>>> for record on topic <TOPIC NAME HERE> as requested by connector" log
>>> messages (which will be emitted at INFO level by
>>> the org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.ExactlyOnceWorkerSourceTask class if
>>> the task is requesting an abort).
>>>
>>> Regardless, I'll work on a fix for the bug with aborting empty
>>> transactions. Thanks for helping uncover that one!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 6:36 PM NITTY BENNY <nittybe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Chris,
>>> >
>>> > We have a use case to commit previous successful records and stop the
>>> > processing of the current file and move on with the next file. To
>>> achieve
>>> > that I called commitTransaction when I reach the first error record,
>>> but
>>> > commit is not happening for me. Kafka connect tries to abort the
>>> > transaction automatically, I checked the _transaction_state topic and
>>> > states marked as PrepareAbort and CompleteAbort. Do you know why kafka
>>> > connect automatically invokes abort instead of the implicit commit I
>>> > called?
>>> > Then as a result, when I tries to parse the next file - say ABC, I saw
>>> the
>>> > logs "Aborting incomplete transaction" and ERROR: "Failed to sent
>>> record to
>>> > topic", and we lost the first batch of records from the current
>>> transaction
>>> > in the file ABC.
>>> >
>>> > Is it possible that there's a case where an abort is being requested
>>> while
>>> > the current transaction is empty (i.e., the task hasn't returned any
>>> > records from SourceTask::poll since the last transaction was
>>> > committed/aborted)? --- Yes, that case is possible for us. There is a
>>> case
>>> > where the first record itself an error record.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Nitty
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:48 PM Chris Egerton <chr...@aiven.io.invalid>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Hi Nitty,
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks for the code examples and the detailed explanations, this is
>>> > really
>>> > > helpful!
>>> > >
>>> > > > Say if I have a file with 5 records and batch size is 2, and in my
>>> 3rd
>>> > > batch I have one error record then in that batch, I dont have a valid
>>> > > record to call commit or abort. But I want to commit all the previous
>>> > > batches that were successfully parsed. How do I do that?
>>> > >
>>> > > An important thing to keep in mind with the TransactionContext API is
>>> > that
>>> > > all records that a task returns from SourceTask::poll are implicitly
>>> > > included in a transaction. Invoking
>>> SourceTaskContext::transactionContext
>>> > > doesn't alter this or cause transactions to start being used;
>>> everything
>>> > is
>>> > > already in a transaction, and the Connect runtime automatically
>>> begins
>>> > > transactions for any records it sees from the task if it hasn't
>>> already
>>> > > begun one. It's also valid to return a null or empty list of records
>>> from
>>> > > SourceTask::poll. So in this case, you can invoke
>>> > > transactionContext.commitTransaction() (the no-args variant) and
>>> return
>>> > an
>>> > > empty batch from SourceTask::poll, which will cause the transaction
>>> > > containing the 4 valid records that were returned in the last 2
>>> batches
>>> > to
>>> > > be committed.
>>> > >
>>> > > FWIW, I would be a little cautious about this approach. Many times
>>> it's
>>> > > better to fail fast on invalid data; it might be worth it to at least
>>> > allow
>>> > > users to configure whether the connector fails on invalid data, or
>>> > silently
>>> > > skips over it (which is what happens when transactions are aborted).
>>> > >
>>> > > > Why is abort not working without adding the last record to the
>>> list?
>>> > >
>>> > > Is it possible that there's a case where an abort is being requested
>>> > while
>>> > > the current transaction is empty (i.e., the task hasn't returned any
>>> > > records from SourceTask::poll since the last transaction was
>>> > > committed/aborted)? I think this may be a bug in the Connect
>>> framework
>>> > > where we don't check to see if a transaction is already open when a
>>> task
>>> > > requests that a transaction be aborted, which can cause tasks to fail
>>> > (see
>>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14799 for more details).
>>> > >
>>> > > Cheers,
>>> > >
>>> > > Chris
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 6:44 PM NITTY BENNY <nittybe...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Hi Chris,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I am not sure if you are able to see the images I shared with you .
>>> > > > Copying the code snippet below,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > if (expectedRecordCount >= 0) {
>>> > > > int missingCount = expectedRecordCount - (int) this.
>>> > > > recordOffset() - 1;
>>> > > > if (missingCount > 0) {
>>> > > > if (transactionContext != null) {
>>> > > > isMissedRecords = true;
>>> > > > } else {
>>> > > > throw new DataException(String.format("Missing %d
>>> > records
>>> > > > (expecting %d, actual %d)", missingCount, expectedRecordCount,
>>> this.
>>> > > > recordOffset()));
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > } else if (missingCount < 0) {
>>> > > > if (transactionContext != null) {
>>> > > > isMissedRecords = true;
>>> > > > } else {
>>> > > > throw new DataException(String.format("Too many
>>> records
>>> > > > (expecting %d, actual %d)", expectedRecordCount,
>>> this.recordOffset()));
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > addLastRecord(records, null, value);
>>> > > > }
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > //asn1 or binary abort
>>> > > > if((config.parseErrorThreshold != null && parseErrorCount
>>> >=
>>> > > > config.parseErrorThreshold
>>> > > > && lastbatch && transactionContext != null) ||
>>> (isMissedRecords
>>> > > > && transactionContext != null && lastbatch)) {
>>> > > > log.info("Transaction is aborting");
>>> > > > log.info("records = {}", records);
>>> > > > if (!records.isEmpty()) {
>>> > > > log.info("with record");
>>> > > >
>>> > > transactionContext.abortTransaction(records.get(records.size
>>> > > > ()-1));
>>> > > > } else {
>>> > > > log.info("without record");
>>> > > > transactionContext.abortTransaction();
>>> > > > }
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > > Nitty
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:38 PM NITTY BENNY <nittybe...@gmail.com>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> Hi Chris,
>>> > > >> Sorry for the typo in my previous email.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Regarding the point 2,* the task returns a batch of records from
>>> > > >> SourceTask::poll (and, if using*
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> *the per-record API provided by the TransactionContext class,
>>> includes
>>> > > >> atleast one record that should trigger a transaction commit/abort
>>> in
>>> > > >> thatbatch)*
>>> > > >> What if I am using the API without passing a record? We have 2
>>> types
>>> > of
>>> > > >> use cases, one where on encountering an error record, we want to
>>> > commit
>>> > > >> previous successful batches and disregard the failed record and
>>> > upcoming
>>> > > >> batches. In this case we created the transactionContext just
>>> before
>>> > > reading
>>> > > >> the file (file is our transaction boundary).Say if I have a file
>>> with
>>> > 5
>>> > > >> records and batch size is 2, and in my 3rd batch I have one error
>>> > record
>>> > > >> then in that batch, I dont have a valid record to call commit or
>>> > abort.
>>> > > But
>>> > > >> I want to commit all the previous batches that were successfully
>>> > parsed.
>>> > > >> How do I do that?
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Second use case is where I want to abort a transaction if the
>>> record
>>> > > >> count doesn't match.
>>> > > >> Code Snippet :
>>> > > >> [image: image.png]
>>> > > >> There are no error records in this case. If you see I added the
>>> > > condition
>>> > > >> of transactionContext check to implement exactly once, without
>>> > > >> transaction it was just throwing the exception without calling the
>>> > > >> addLastRecord() method and in the catch block it just logs the
>>> message
>>> > > and
>>> > > >> return the list of records without the last record to poll().To
>>> make
>>> > it
>>> > > >> work, I called the method addLastRecord() in this case, so it is
>>> not
>>> > > >> throwing the exception and list has last record as well. Then I
>>> called
>>> > > the
>>> > > >> abort, everything got aborted. Why is abort not working without
>>> adding
>>> > > the
>>> > > >> last record to the list?
>>> > > >> [image: image.png]
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Code to call abort.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Thanks,
>>> > > >> Nitty
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 4:26 PM Chris Egerton
>>> <chr...@aiven.io.invalid
>>> > >
>>> > > >> wrote:
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>> Hi Nitty,
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> I'm a little confused about what you mean by this part:
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> > transaction is not getting completed because it is not
>>> commiting
>>> > the
>>> > > >>> transaction offest.
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> The only conditions required for a transaction to be completed
>>> when a
>>> > > >>> connector is defining its own transaction boundaries are:
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> 1. The task requests a transaction commit/abort from the
>>> > > >>> TransactionContext
>>> > > >>> 2. The task returns a batch of records from SourceTask::poll
>>> (and, if
>>> > > >>> using
>>> > > >>> the per-record API provided by the TransactionContext class,
>>> includes
>>> > > at
>>> > > >>> least one record that should trigger a transaction commit/abort
>>> in
>>> > that
>>> > > >>> batch)
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> The Connect runtime should automatically commit source offsets to
>>> > Kafka
>>> > > >>> whenever a transaction is completed, either by commit or abort.
>>> This
>>> > is
>>> > > >>> because transactions should only be aborted for data that should
>>> > never
>>> > > be
>>> > > >>> re-read by the connector; if there is a validation error that
>>> should
>>> > be
>>> > > >>> handled by reconfiguring the connector, then the task should
>>> throw an
>>> > > >>> exception instead of aborting the transaction.
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> If possible, do you think you could provide a brief code snippet
>>> > > >>> illustrating what your task is doing that's causing issues?
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> Cheers,
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> Chris (not Chrise 🙂)
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 10:17 AM NITTY BENNY <
>>> nittybe...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>> wrote:
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>> > Hi Chrise,
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > Thanks for sharing the details.
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > Regarding the use case, For Asn1 source connector we have a use
>>> > case
>>> > > to
>>> > > >>> > validate number of records in the file with the number of
>>> records
>>> > in
>>> > > >>> the
>>> > > >>> > header. So currently, if validation fails we are not sending
>>> the
>>> > last
>>> > > >>> > record to the topic. But after introducing exactly once with
>>> > > connector
>>> > > >>> > transaction boundary, I can see that if I call an abort when
>>> the
>>> > > >>> validation
>>> > > >>> > fails, transaction is not getting completed because it is not
>>> > > >>> commiting the
>>> > > >>> > transaction offest. I saw that transaction state changed to
>>> > > >>> CompleteAbort.
>>> > > >>> > So for my next transaction I am getting
>>> > InvalidProducerEpochException
>>> > > >>> and
>>> > > >>> > then task stopped after that. I tried calling the abort after
>>> > sending
>>> > > >>> last
>>> > > >>> > record to the topic then transaction getting completed.
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > I dont know if I am doing anything wrong here.
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > Please advise.
>>> > > >>> > Thanks,
>>> > > >>> > Nitty
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > On Tue 7 Mar 2023 at 2:21 p.m., Chris Egerton
>>> > > <chr...@aiven.io.invalid
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>> > > Hi Nitty,
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > We've recently added some documentation on implementing
>>> > > exactly-once
>>> > > >>> > source
>>> > > >>> > > connectors here:
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#connect_exactlyoncesourceconnectors
>>> > > >>> > > .
>>> > > >>> > > To quote a relevant passage from those docs:
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > > In order for a source connector to take advantage of this
>>> > > support,
>>> > > >>> it
>>> > > >>> > > must be able to provide meaningful source offsets for each
>>> record
>>> > > >>> that it
>>> > > >>> > > emits, and resume consumption from the external system at the
>>> > exact
>>> > > >>> > > position corresponding to any of those offsets without
>>> dropping
>>> > or
>>> > > >>> > > duplicating messages.
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > So, as long as your source connector is able to use the Kafka
>>> > > Connect
>>> > > >>> > > framework's offsets API correctly, it shouldn't be necessary
>>> to
>>> > > make
>>> > > >>> any
>>> > > >>> > > other code changes to the connector.
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > To enable exactly-once support for source connectors on your
>>> > > Connect
>>> > > >>> > > cluster, see the docs section here:
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#connect_exactlyoncesource
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > With regard to transactions, a transactional producer is
>>> always
>>> > > >>> created
>>> > > >>> > > automatically for your connector by the Connect runtime when
>>> > > >>> exactly-once
>>> > > >>> > > support is enabled on the worker. The only reason to set
>>> > > >>> > > "transaction.boundary" to "connector" is if your connector
>>> would
>>> > > >>> like to
>>> > > >>> > > explicitly define its own transaction boundaries. In this
>>> case,
>>> > it
>>> > > >>> sounds
>>> > > >>> > > like may be what you want; I just want to make sure to call
>>> out
>>> > > that
>>> > > >>> in
>>> > > >>> > > either case, you should not be directly instantiating a
>>> producer
>>> > in
>>> > > >>> your
>>> > > >>> > > connector code, but let the Kafka Connect runtime do that for
>>> > you,
>>> > > >>> and
>>> > > >>> > just
>>> > > >>> > > worry about returning the right records from SourceTask::poll
>>> > (and
>>> > > >>> > possibly
>>> > > >>> > > defining custom transactions using the TransactionContext
>>> API).
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > With respect to your question about committing or aborting in
>>> > > certain
>>> > > >>> > > circumstances, it'd be useful to know more about your use
>>> case,
>>> > > >>> since it
>>> > > >>> > > may not be necessary to define custom transaction boundaries
>>> in
>>> > > your
>>> > > >>> > > connector at all.
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > Cheers,
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > Chris
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 7:21 AM NITTY BENNY <
>>> nittybe...@gmail.com
>>> > >
>>> > > >>> wrote:
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> > > > Hi Team,
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > Adding on top of this, I tried creating a
>>> TransactionContext
>>> > > >>> object and
>>> > > >>> > > > calling the commitTransaction and abortTranaction methods
>>> in
>>> > > source
>>> > > >>> > > > connectors.
>>> > > >>> > > > But the main problem I saw is that if there is any error
>>> while
>>> > > >>> parsing
>>> > > >>> > > the
>>> > > >>> > > > record, connect is calling an abort but we have a use case
>>> to
>>> > > call
>>> > > >>> > commit
>>> > > >>> > > > in some cases. Is it a valid use case in terms of kafka
>>> > connect?
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > Another Question - Should I use a transactional producer
>>> > instead
>>> > > >>> > > > creating an object of TransactionContext? Below is the
>>> > connector
>>> > > >>> > > > configuration I am using.
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > exactly.once.support: "required"
>>> > > >>> > > > transaction.boundary: "connector"
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > Could you please help me here?
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > Thanks,
>>> > > >>> > > > Nitty
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 12:29 AM NITTY BENNY <
>>> > > nittybe...@gmail.com>
>>> > > >>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > > > > Hi Team,
>>> > > >>> > > > > I am trying to implement exactly once behavior in our
>>> source
>>> > > >>> > connector.
>>> > > >>> > > > Is
>>> > > >>> > > > > there any sample source connector implementation
>>> available to
>>> > > >>> have a
>>> > > >>> > > look
>>> > > >>> > > > > at?
>>> > > >>> > > > > Regards,
>>> > > >>> > > > > Nitty
>>> > > >>> > > > >
>>> > > >>> > > >
>>> > > >>> > >
>>> > > >>> >
>>> > > >>>
>>> > > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
