In a Kafka Streams app, an instance only gets messages of an input topic for the partitions that have been assigned to that instance. And as the group.id, which is based on the (for all instances identical) application.id, that means that every instance sees only parts of a topic.
This all makes perfect sense of course, and we make use of that with the high-throughput data topic, but we would also like to control the streams application by adding topic-wide "control messages" to the input topic. But as all instances need to get those messages, we would either have to send
one control message per partition (making it necessary for the sender to know about the partitioning scheme, something we would like to avoid)
one control message per key (so every active partition would be getting at least one control message)
Because this is cumbersome for the sender, we are thinking about creating a new topic for control messages that the streams application consumes, in addition to the data topic. But how can we make it so that every partition receives all messages from the control message topic?
According to https://stackoverflow.com/a/55236780/709537, the group id cannot be set for Kafka Streams.
One way to do this would be to create and use a KafkaConsumer in addition to using Kafka Streams, which would allow us to set the group id as we like. However this sounds complex and dirty enough to wonder if there isn't a more straightforward way that we are missing.
Any ideas?
You can use a global store which sources data from all the partitions.
From the documentation,
Adds a global StateStore to the topology. The StateStore sources its
data from all partitions of the provided input topic. There will be
exactly one instance of this StateStore per Kafka Streams instance.
The syntax is as follows:
public StreamsBuilder addGlobalStore(StoreBuilder storeBuilder,
String topic,
Consumed consumed,
ProcessorSupplier stateUpdateSupplier)
The last argument is the ProcessorSupplier which has a get() that returns a Processor that will be executed for every new message. The Processor contains the process() method that will be executed every time there is a new message to the topic.
The global store is per stream instance, so you get all the topic data in every stream instance.
In the process(K key, V value), you can write your processing logic.
A global store can be in-memory or persistent and can be backed by a changelog topic, so that even if the streams instance local data (state) is deleted, the store can be built using the changelog topic.
I have a ecommerce like system which produces user events of different kind .
I need to store them in kafka for asynch data analysis. I want events for specific users goes to one queue partition so that consumers gets all messages
on one partition . This won't be dedicated queue for a user. Which means single partition can store the data for multiple customer. Not sure how
I can achieve it in kafka ?
To send messages of specific users to the same partition, you can use the key= parameter of producer's send method. You can set this parameter to a byte encoded value which must be unique.
For example, in Python:
producer.send("topic", json.dumps(msg).encode()), key=str(user_id).encode())
This will ensure that messages concerning a given user will be pushed into the same topic's partition.
#zebra8844 answer is correct. The same key will always go to the same partition unless you increase the number of partitions in the future then this will not be the case. So just keep this in mind for future.
Should I use the Kafka Consumer API or the Kafka Streams API for this use case? I have a topic with a number of consumer groups consuming off it. This topic contains one type of event which is a JSON message with a type field buried internally. Some messages will be consumed by some consumer groups and not by others, one consumer group will probably not be consuming many messages at all.
My question is:
Should I use the consumer API, then on each event read the type field and drop or process the event based on the type field.
OR, should I filter using the Streams API, filter method and predicate?
After I consume an event, the plan is to process that event (DB delete, update, or other depending on the service) then if there is a failure I will produce to a separate queue which I will re-process later.
Thanks you.
This seems more a matter of opinion. I personally would go with Streams/KSQL, likely smaller code that you would have to maintain. You can have another intermediary topic that contains the cleaned up data that you can then attach a Connect sink, other consumers, or other Stream and KSQL processes. Using streams you can scale a single application on different machines, you can store state, have standby replicas and more, which would be a PITA to do it all yourself.
I have multiple messages (more specifically log messages) in a certain topic which have the same id for a block of messages (these id's keep changing but remain same for a certain block of messages) and I need to find a way to group all the messages with that id or share the data contained in those messages with the same id between all the consumers in a consumer group.
So is there any way I could share data among various consumers in a consumer group?
This sounds like a sessionization use case to me. Kafka doesn't provide any means of grouping or nesting messages together so you'd have to do that yourself by keeping state in the consumer while processing and wrap the group of messages with some kind of header. Then you could push this to a new topic of wrapped message groups.
A better approach would probably be to make use of an external database or other system with more flexible means of selecting or organizing data based on fields. You can have a look at this blogpost for an example using Spark streaming + HBase.
There are two ways you can do that.
When you publish the message itself, create a message with partition key, so all the messages with same id goes to single partition. then in the consumer side it will always consumed by single consumer.[https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/0.8.0+Producer+Example]
If you use Spark-streaming in consumer side, you could use sliding window concept to group all the same id messages.[http://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/streaming-programming-guide.html#window-operations]
As per Apache Kafka documentation, the order of the messages can be achieved within the partition or one partition in a topic. In this case, what is the parallelism benefit we are getting and it is equivalent to traditional MQs, isn't it?
In Kafka the parallelism is equal to the number of partitions for a topic.
For example, assume that your messages are partitioned based on user_id and consider 4 messages having user_ids 1,2,3 and 4. Assume that you have an "users" topic with 4 partitions.
Since partitioning is based on user_id, assume that message having user_id 1 will go to partition 1, message having user_id 2 will go to partition 2 and so on..
Also assume that you have 4 consumers for the topic. Since you have 4 consumers, Kafka will assign each consumer to one partition. So in this case as soon as 4 messages are pushed, they are immediately consumed by the consumers.
If you had 2 consumers for the topic instead of 4, then each consumer will be handling 2 partitions and the consuming throughput will be almost half.
To completely answer your question,
Kafka only provides a total order over messages within a partition, not between different partitions in a topic.
ie, if consumption is very slow in partition 2 and very fast in partition 4, then message with user_id 4 will be consumed before message with user_id 2. This is how Kafka is designed.
I decided to move my comment to a separate answer as I think it makes sense to do so.
While John is 100% right about what he wrote, you may consider rethinking your problem. Do you really need ALL messages to stay in order? Or do you need all messages for specific user_id (or whatever) to stay in order?
If the first, then there's no much you can do, you should use 1 partition and lose all the parallelism ability.
But if the second case, you might consider partitioning your messages by some key and thus all messages for that key will arrive to one partition (they actually might go to another partition if you resize topic, but that's a different case) and thus will guarantee that all messages for that key are in order.
In kafka Messages with the same key, from the same Producer, are delivered to the Consumer in order
another thing on top of that is, Data within a Partition will be stored in the order in which it is written therefore, data read from a Partition will be read in order for that partition
So if you want to get your messages in order across multi partitions, then you really need to group your messages with a key, so that messages with same key goes to same partition and with in that partition the messages are ordered.
In a nutshell, you will need to design a two level solution like above logically to get the messages ordered across multi partition.
You may consider having a field which has the Timestamp/Date at the time of creation of the dataset at the source.
Once, the data is consumed you can load the data into database. The data needs to be sorted at the database level before using the dataset for any usecase. Well, this is an attempt to help you think in multiple ways.
Let's consider we have a message key as the timestamp which is generated at the time of creation of the data and the value is the actual message string.
As and when a message is picked up by the consumer, the message is written into HBase with the RowKey as the kafka key and value as the kafka value.
Since, HBase is a sorted map having timestamp as a key will automatically sorts the data in order. Then you can serve the data from HBase for the downstream apps.
In this way you are not loosing the parallelism of kafka. You also have the privilege of processing sorting and performing multiple processing logics on the data at the database level.
Note: Any distributed message broker does not guarantee overall ordering. If you are insisting for that you may need to rethink using another message broker or you need to have single partition in kafka which is not a good idea. Kafka is all about parallelism by increasing partitions or increasing consumer groups.
Traditional MQ works in a way such that once a message has been processed, it gets removed from the queue. A message queue allows a bunch of subscribers to pull a message, or a batch of messages, from the end of the queue. Queues usually allow for some level of transaction when pulling a message off, to ensure that the desired action was executed, before the message gets removed, but once a message has been processed, it gets removed from the queue.
With Kafka on the other hand, you publish messages/events to topics, and they get persisted. They don’t get removed when consumers receive them. This allows you to replay messages, but more importantly, it allows a multitude of consumers to process logic based on the same messages/events.
You can still scale out to get parallel processing in the same domain, but more importantly, you can add different types of consumers that execute different logic based on the same event. In other words, with Kafka, you can adopt a reactive pub/sub architecture.
ref: https://hackernoon.com/a-super-quick-comparison-between-kafka-and-message-queues-e69742d855a8
Well, this is an old thread, but still relevant, hence decided to share my view.
I think this question is a bit confusing.
If you need strict ordering of messages, then the same strict ordering should be maintained while consuming the messages. There is absolutely no point in ordering message in queue, but not while consuming it. Kafka allows best of both worlds. It allows ordering the message within a partition right from the generation till consumption while allowing parallelism between multiple partition. Hence, if you need
Absolute ordering of all events published on a topic, use single partition. You will not have parallelism, nor do you need (again parallel and strict ordering don't go together).
Go for multiple partition and consumer, use consistent hashing to ensure all messages which need to follow relative order goes to a single partition.