I want to process a topic in application startup using Confluent dotnet client. Assume following example:
while (true)
{
try
{
var cr = c.Consume();
Console.WriteLine($"Consumed message '{cr.Value}' at: '{cr.TopicPartitionOffset}'.");
}
catch (ConsumeException e)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Error occured: {e.Error.Reason}");
}
}
When there is no new message in Kafka, c.Consume will be blocked. Because I want to use it for application startup (Like cache warm up) I want to proceed my code when I found there is no new message.
I know there is an overload for setting timeout like c.Consume(timeout) but the problem with this approach is that if you have a message in your topic and the time duration of reading the message was more than your timeout, You receive null output which is not desirable.
The consumer(s) is not supposed to be aware of the producer(s).
Now if you want to know that you have read everything in the topic from the moment you start to consume, you can:
Load the newest offset before starting to consume.
Then start consuming messages.
If the message's offset is the same as the newest offset you loaded before, stop consuming.
I'm not a C# developper but from what I read in the dotnet confluent doc you can call QueryWatermarkOffsetson the consumer to get oldest and newest offset. https://docs.confluent.io/current/clients/confluent-kafka-dotnet/api/Confluent.Kafka.Consumer.html#Confluent_Kafka_Consumer_QueryWatermarkOffsets_Confluent_Kafka_TopicPartition_
And then, on the Messageclass you have an Offset accessor. So the whole thing should not be too hard to achieve.
https://docs.confluent.io/current/clients/confluent-kafka-dotnet/api/Confluent.Kafka.Message.html#Confluent_Kafka_Message_Offset
You can use OnPartitionEOF event that indicates you have reached the end of partition.
CancellationTokenSource source = new CancellationTokenSource();
bool isContinue = true;
c.OnPartitionEOF += (o, e) =>
{
Console.WriteLine($"You have reached end of partition");
isContinue = false;
source.Cancel();
};
while (isContinue)
{
try
{
var cr = c.Consume(source.Token);
Console.WriteLine($"Consumed message '{cr.Value}' at: '{cr.TopicPartitionOffset}'.");
}
catch (ConsumeException e)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Error occured: {e.Error.Reason}");
}
}
I found the Consumer.IsPartitionEOF useful.
Related
I'm having a hard time figuring simple patterns for handling exceptions in the consumer of a Kafka topic.
Scenario is as follows: in the consumer I call an external service. If the service is unavailable I want to retry a few times and then stop consuming.
The simplest pattern seems a blocking synchronous way of dealing with it, something like this in java:
ConsumerRecords<String, String> records = consumer.poll(100);
for (ConsumerRecord<String, String> record : records) {
boolean processed=false;
int count=0;
while (!processed) {
try {
callService(..);
} catch (Exception e) {
if (count++ < 3) {
Thread.sleep(5000);
continue;
} else throw new RuntimeException();
}
}
}
However, I have the feeling there must be a simpler approach (without using third party libraries), and one that avoids blocking the thread.
Seems like a common thing we would like to have, yet I could not find a simple example for this pattern.
There is no such retrial mechanism provided by Kafka out of the box. With the experience of using RabbitMQ where the MQ provides a retry exchange. These exchanges are called as Dead-Letter-Exchanges in RabbitMQ.
https://www.rabbitmq.com/dlx.html
You can apply the same pattern in the case of kafka.
On message processing failure we can publish a copy of the message to another topic and wait for the next message. Let’s call the new topic the ‘retry_topic’. The consumer of the ‘retry_topic’ will receive the message from the Kafka and then will wait some predefined time, for example one hour, before starting the message processing. This way we can postpone next attempts of the message processing without any impact on the ‘main_topic’ consumer. If processing in the ‘retry_topic’ consumer fails we just have to give up and store the message in the ‘failed_topic’ for further manual handling of this problem. The ‘main_topic’ consumer code may look like this:
Pushing message to retry_topic on failure/exception
void consumeMainTopicWithPostponedRetry() {
while (true) {
Message message = takeNextMessage("main_topic");
try {
process(message);
} catch (Exception ex) {
publishTo("retry_topic");
LOGGER.warn("Message processing failure. Will try once again in the future.", ex);
}
}
}
Consumer of the retry topic
void consumeRetryTopic() {
while (true) {
Message message = takeNextMessage("retry_topic");
try {
process(message);
waitSomeLongerTime();
} catch (Exception ex) {
publishTo("failed_topic");
LOGGER.warn("Message processing failure. Will skip it.", ex);
}
}
}
The above strategy and examples are picked from the below link. The whole credit goes to the owner of the blog post.
https://blog.pragmatists.com/retrying-consumer-architecture-in-the-apache-kafka-939ac4cb851a
For non-blocking way of doing above can be understood by reading the whole blog post. Hope this helps.
I have Kafka commit policy set to latest and missing first few messages. If I give a sleep of 20 seconds before starting to send the messages to the input topic, everything is working as desired. I am not sure if the problem is with consumer taking long time for partition rebalancing. Is there a way to know if the consumer is ready before starting to poll ?
You can use consumer.assignment(), it will return set of partitions and verify whether all of the partitions are assigned which are available for that topic.
If you are using spring-kafka project, you can include spring-kafka-test dependancy and use below method to wait for topic assignment , but you need to have container.
ContainerTestUtils.waitForAssignment(Object container, int partitions);
You can do the following:
I have a test that reads data from kafka topic.
So you can't use KafkaConsumer in multithread environment, but you can pass parameter "AtomicReference assignment", update it in consumer-thread, and read it in another thread.
For example, snipped of working code in project for testing:
private void readAvro(String readFromKafka,
AtomicBoolean needStop,
List<Event> events,
String bootstrapServers,
int readTimeout) {
// print the topic name
AtomicReference<Set<TopicPartition>> assignment = new AtomicReference<>();
new Thread(() -> readAvro(bootstrapServers, readFromKafka, needStop, events, readTimeout, assignment)).start();
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
long maxWaitingTime = 30_000;
for (long time = System.currentTimeMillis(); System.currentTimeMillis() - time < maxWaitingTime;) {
Set<TopicPartition> assignments = Optional.ofNullable(assignment.get()).orElse(new HashSet<>());
System.out.println("[!kafka-consumer!] Assignments [" + assignments.size() + "]: "
+ assignments.stream().map(v -> String.valueOf(v.partition())).collect(Collectors.joining(",")));
if (assignments.size() > 0) {
break;
}
try {
Thread.sleep(1_000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
needStop.set(true);
break;
}
}
System.out.println("Subscribed! Wait summary: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime));
}
private void readAvro(String bootstrapServers,
String readFromKafka,
AtomicBoolean needStop,
List<Event> events,
int readTimeout,
AtomicReference<Set<TopicPartition>> assignment) {
KafkaConsumer<String, byte[]> consumer = (KafkaConsumer<String, byte[]>) queueKafkaConsumer(bootstrapServers, "latest");
System.out.println("Subscribed to topic: " + readFromKafka);
consumer.subscribe(Collections.singletonList(readFromKafka));
long started = System.currentTimeMillis();
while (!needStop.get()) {
assignment.set(consumer.assignment());
ConsumerRecords<String, byte[]> records = consumer.poll(1_000);
events.addAll(CommonUtils4Tst.readEvents(records));
if (readTimeout == -1) {
if (events.size() > 0) {
break;
}
} else if (System.currentTimeMillis() - started > readTimeout) {
break;
}
}
needStop.set(true);
synchronized (MainTest.class) {
MainTest.class.notifyAll();
}
consumer.close();
}
P.S.
needStop - global flag, to stop all running thread if any in case of failure of success
events - list of object, that i want to check
readTimeout - how much time we will wait until read all data, if readTimeout == -1, then stop when we read anything
Thanks to Alexey (I have also voted up), I seemed to have resolved my issue essentially following the same idea.
Just want to share my experience... in our case we using Kafka in request & response way, somewhat like RPC. Request is being sent on one topic and then waiting for response on another topic. Running into a similar issue i.e. missing out first response.
I have tried ... KafkaConsumer.assignment(); repeatedly (with Thread.sleep(100);) but doesn't seem to help. Adding a KafkaConsumer.poll(50); seems to have primed the consumer (group) and receiving the first response too. Tested few times and it consistently working now.
BTW, testing requires stopping application & deleting Kafka topics and, for a good measure, restarted Kafka too.
PS: Just calling poll(50); without assignment(); fetching logic, like Alexey mentioned, may not guarantee that consumer (group) is ready.
You can modify an AlwaysSeekToEndListener (listens only to new messages) to include a callback:
public class AlwaysSeekToEndListener<K, V> implements ConsumerRebalanceListener {
private final Consumer<K, V> consumer;
private Runnable callback;
public AlwaysSeekToEndListener(Consumer<K, V> consumer) {
this.consumer = consumer;
}
public AlwaysSeekToEndListener(Consumer<K, V> consumer, Runnable callback) {
this.consumer = consumer;
this.callback = callback;
}
#Override
public void onPartitionsRevoked(Collection<TopicPartition> partitions) {
}
#Override
public void onPartitionsAssigned(Collection<TopicPartition> partitions) {
consumer.seekToEnd(partitions);
if (callback != null) {
callback.run();
}
}
}
and subscribe with a latch callback:
CountDownLatch initLatch = new CountDownLatch(1);
consumer.subscribe(singletonList(topic), new AlwaysSeekToEndListener<>(consumer, () -> initLatch.countDown()));
initLatch.await(); // blocks until consumer is ready and listening
then proceed to start your producer.
If your policy is set to latest - which takes effect if there are no previously committed offsets - but you have no previously committed offsets, then you should not worry about 'missing' messages, because you're telling Kafka not to care about messages that were sent 'previously' to your consumers being ready.
If you care about 'previous' messages, you should set the policy to earliest.
In any case, whatever the policy, the behaviour you are seeing is transient, i.e. once committed offsets are saved in Kafka, on every restart the consumers will pick up where they left previoulsy
I needed to know if a kafka consumer was ready before doing some testing, so i tried with consumer.assignment(), but it only returned the set of partitions assigned, but there was a problem, with this i cannot see if this partitions assigned to the group had offset setted, so later when i tried to use the consumer it didn´t have offset setted correctly.
The solutions was to use committed(), this will give you the last commited offsets of the given partitions that you put in the arguments.
So you can do something like: consumer.committed(consumer.assignment())
If there is no partitions assigned yet it will return:
{}
If there is partitions assigned, but no offset yet:
{name.of.topic-0=null, name.of.topic-1=null}
But if there is partitions and offset:
{name.of.topic-0=OffsetAndMetadata{offset=5197881, leaderEpoch=null, metadata=''}, name.of.topic-1=OffsetAndMetadata{offset=5198832, leaderEpoch=null, metadata=''}}
With this information you can use something like:
consumer.committed(consumer.assignment()).isEmpty();
consumer.committed(consumer.assignment()).containsValue(null);
And with this information you can be sure that the kafka consumer is ready.
If I have a enable.auto.commit=false and I call consumer.poll() without calling consumer.commitAsync() after, why does consumer.poll() return
new records the next time it's called?
Since I did not commit my offset, I would expect poll() would return the latest offset which should be the same records again.
I'm asking because I'm trying to handle failure scenarios during my processing. I was hoping without committing the offset, the poll() would return the same records again so I can re-process those failed records again.
public class MyConsumer implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
ConsumerRecords<String, LogLine> records = consumer.poll(Long.MAX_VALUE);
for (ConsumerRecord record : records) {
try {
//process record
consumer.commitAsync();
} catch (Exception e) {
}
/**
If exception happens above, I was expecting poll to return new records so I can re-process the record that caused the exception.
**/
}
}
}
}
The starting offset of a poll is not decided by the broker but by the consumer. The consumer tracks the last received offset and asks for the following bunch of messages during the next poll.
Offset commits come into play when a consumer stops or fails and another instance that is not aware of the last consumed offset picks up consumption of a partition.
KafkaConsumer has pretty extensive Javadoc that is well worth a read.
Consumer will read from last commit offset if it get re balanced (means if any consumer leave the group or new consumer added) so handling de-duplication does not come straight forward in kafka so you have to store the last process offset in external store and when rebalance happens or app restart you should seek to that offset and start processing or you should check against some unique key in message against DB to find is dublicate
I would like to share some code how you can solve this in Java code.
The approach is that you poll the records, try to process them and if an exception occurs, you seek to the minima of the topic partitions. After that, you do the commitAsync().
public class MyConsumer implements Runnable {
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
List<ConsumerRecord<String, LogLine>> records = StreamSupport
.stream( consumer.poll(Long.MAX_VALUE).spliterator(), true )
.collect( Collectors.toList() );
boolean exceptionRaised = false;
for (ConsumerRecord<String, LogLine> record : records) {
try {
// process record
} catch (Exception e) {
exceptionRaised = true;
break;
}
}
if( exceptionRaised ) {
Map<TopicPartition, Long> offsetMinimumForTopicAndPartition = records
.stream()
.collect( Collectors.toMap( r -> new TopicPartition( r.topic(), r.partition() ),
ConsumerRecord::offset,
Math::min
) );
for( Map.Entry<TopicPartition, Long> entry : offsetMinimumForTopicAndPartition.entrySet() ) {
consumer.seek( entry.getKey(), entry.getValue() );
}
}
consumer.commitAsync();
}
}
}
With this setup, you poll the messages again and again until you successfully process all messages of one poll.
Please note, that your code should be able to handle a poison pill. Otherwise, your code will stuck in an endless loop.
After developing and executing my Storm (1.0.1) topology with a KafkaSpout and a couple of Bolts, I noticed a huge network traffic even when the topology is idle (no message on Kafka, no processing is done in bolts). So I started to comment out my topology piece by piece in order to find the cause and now I have only the KafkaSpout in my main:
....
final SpoutConfig spoutConfig = new SpoutConfig(
new ZkHosts(zkHosts, "/brokers"),
"files-topic", // topic
"/kafka", // ZK chroot
"consumer-group-name");
spoutConfig.scheme = new SchemeAsMultiScheme(new StringScheme());
spoutConfig.startOffsetTime = OffsetRequest.LatestTime();
topologyBuilder.setSpout(
"kafka-spout-id,
new KafkaSpout(config),
1);
....
When this (useless) topology executes, even in local mode, even the very first time, the network traffic always grows a lot: I see (in my Activity Monitor)
An average of 432 KB of data received/sec
After a couple of hours the topology is running (idle) data received is 1.26GB and data sent is 1GB
(Important: Kafka is not running in cluster, a single instance that runs in the same machine with a single topic and a single partition. I just downloaded Kafka on my machine, started it and created a simple topic. When I put a message in the topic, everything in the topology is working without any problem at all)
Obviously, the reason is in the KafkaSpout.nextTuple() method (below), but I don't understand why, without any message in Kafka, I should have such traffic. Is there something I didn't consider? Is that the expected behaviour? I had a look at Kafka logs, ZK logs, nothing, I have cleaned up Kafka and ZK data, nothing, still the same behaviour.
#Override
public void nextTuple() {
List<PartitionManager> managers = _coordinator.getMyManagedPartitions();
for (int i = 0; i < managers.size(); i++) {
try {
// in case the number of managers decreased
_currPartitionIndex = _currPartitionIndex % managers.size();
EmitState state = managers.get(_currPartitionIndex).next(_collector);
if (state != EmitState.EMITTED_MORE_LEFT) {
_currPartitionIndex = (_currPartitionIndex + 1) % managers.size();
}
if (state != EmitState.NO_EMITTED) {
break;
}
} catch (FailedFetchException e) {
LOG.warn("Fetch failed", e);
_coordinator.refresh();
}
}
long diffWithNow = System.currentTimeMillis() - _lastUpdateMs;
/*
As far as the System.currentTimeMillis() is dependent on System clock,
additional check on negative value of diffWithNow in case of external changes.
*/
if (diffWithNow > _spoutConfig.stateUpdateIntervalMs || diffWithNow < 0) {
commit();
}
}
Put a sleep for one second (1000ms) in the nextTuple() method and observe the traffic now, For example,
#Override
public void nextTuple() {
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
} catch(Exception ex){
log.error("Ëxception while sleeping...",e);
}
List<PartitionManager> managers = _coordinator.getMyManagedPartitions();
for (int i = 0; i < managers.size(); i++) {
...
...
...
...
}
The reason is, kafka consumer works on the basis of pull methodology which means, consumers will pull data from kafka brokers. So in consumer point of view (Kafka Spout) will do a fetch request to the kafka broker continuously which is a TCP network request. So you are facing a huge statistics on the data packet sent/received. Though the consumer doesn't consumes any message, pull request and empty response also will get account into network data packet sent/received statistics. Your network traffic will be less if your sleeping time is high. There are also some network related configurations for the brokers and also for consumer. Doing the research on configuration may helps you. Hope it will helps you.
Is your bolt receiving messages ? Do your bolt inherits BaseRichBolt ?
Comment out that line m.fail(id.offset) in Kafaspout and check it out. If your bolt doesn't ack then your spout assumes that message is failed and try to replay the same message.
public void fail(Object msgId) {
KafkaMessageId id = (KafkaMessageId) msgId;
PartitionManager m = _coordinator.getManager(id.partition);
if (m != null) {
//m.fail(id.offset);
}
Also try halt the nextTuple() for few millis and check it out.
Let me know if it helps
I am using rabbitmq and I want to make sure that if I have a connection problem in the client, the messages that I posted won't be lost. I simulate it with eclipse: I do system.exit the program of fetching after 100 messages. I posted 1000 messages. The second run I don't limit the number of messages and it returns me 840 messages with 3 times. Can you help me?
the code of the producer is:
public void run() {
String json =SimpleQueueServiceSample.getFromList();
while (!(json.equals(""))){
json =SimpleQueueServiceSample.getFromList();
try {
c.basicPublish("", "test",
MessageProperties.PERSISTENT_TEXT_PLAIN, json.getBytes());
} catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
try {
c.waitForConfirmsOrDie();
} catch (IOException e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
e.printStackTrace();
}
the code of the consumber is:
QueueingConsumer consumer = new QueueingConsumer(channel);
channel.basicConsume(QUEUE_NAME, true, consumer);
while (true) {
System.out.println(count++);
QueueingConsumer.Delivery delivery = consumer.nextDelivery();
String message = new String(delivery.getBody());
System.out.println(" [x] Received '" + message + "'");
}
So the challenge for your scenario is how you're handling the acknowledgements.
channel.basicConsume(QUEUE_NAME, true, consumer);
Is the problem. The second parameter of true is the auto-acknowledge field.
To fix that, use:
channel.basicConsume(QUEUE_NAME, false, consumer);
while (true) {
QueueingConsumer.Delivery delivery = consumer.nextDelivery();
//...
channel.basicAck(delivery.getEnvelope().getDeliveryTag(), false);
}
It looks like you're using RabbitMQ's tutorials, and your code snippet is from part one. If you look at part two, they start talking about acknowledgements and setting up quality of service to provide round-robin dispatch.
It's worth pointing out that the basicConsume() and nextDelivery() combination rely upon a hidden queue that lives within the consumer. So when you call basicConsume() several messages are pulled down to the client to local storage.
The benefit at that approach is that it avoids additional network overhead from calling for each individual message. The problem is that it can put more messages within your local consumer than you wish and you may lose messages if the consumer drops before processing all of the messages in the local hidden queue.
If you truly want your consumers only working on one message a time so that nothing is lost, you probably want to look at the basicGet() method instead of the basicConsume().