So there is a Kafka cluster and we have a Schema registry on top of it to validate schema for topics. For some maintenance reason if schema registry is down, Kafka will have downtime for that duration and it will not accept any new incoming data request ?
Kafka consumers and producers cache the schemas they retrieve from the schema registry internally. The Schema Registry is only contacted when a record is sent/received for which no schema was previously seen.
So as long as you don't start any new consumers/producers or send records with schemas that have not been previously sent you should be fine.
Take this with a grain of salt though, I've looked through the code and run a quick test with the console consumer and producer and could still produce and consume after killing the schema registry, but there may be cases where it still fails.
Update:
It occurred to me today that I probably have answered your question too literal, instead of trying to understand what you are trying to do :)
If you want to enable maintenance windows on your schema registry, it might be worthwhile looking into running two or more schema registries in parallel and configure both of them in your producers and consumers.
One of them will be elected master and write requests for schemas will be forwarded to that instance. That way you can perform rolling restarts if you need maintenance windows.
The KafkaAvroSerializer and deserializer maintain a schema ID cache.
So as long as no new producers and consumers come online, you would see no errors.
If the registry was down, Kafka will not have downtime, but you will start to see network exception errors in the clients since they use HTTP to talk to the registry whereas Kafka uses its own TCP protocol
Related
Kafka has multiple bootstrap server like b1.com, b2.com, b3.com. While Producer Configuration, we are passing only b1.com as bootstrap server. What will happen once we will publish data to kafka?
As of my knowledge, it should not allow to publish the data if b1.com is not leader as kafka allow publishing data through leader only. Please guide me.
Even if b1.com is not the leader, you would still be able to publish data successfully. The reason being once you connect to a server, you can get the complete metadata of your topic (partitions, their respective leaders etc).
That being said, it is still recommended to provide all servers. Reason for this is the scenario where b1.com goes down. Now since you provided only one server to your producer, it will not be able to connect to kafka and your system effectively goes down.
On the other hand, if you had provided all the servers and assuming your topic was replicated - the system would still be functional even if b1.com had gone down.
I have a table that is updated once / twice a day, but I want the data to be pushed to Kafka immediately after the table is updated. Is it possible to avoid running the connector every poll.interval.ms, but rather to run it only after the table is updated (sync on demand or trigger the sync in some other way after the table update)
I apologize if this question is stupid... Can sink connector be running on one Kafka cluster, but pull messages from another Kafka cluster and insert them into Postgres. I'm not talking about replicating messages from Cluster A to Cluster B and then inserting messages from Cluster B to Postgres. I'm talking about Connector running on Cluster B but pulling messages from Cluster A and writing them to Postgres.
Thanks!
If you use log-based change data capture (Debezium, etc) then you capture changes as soon as they are there, without needing to re-query the database. If you use query-based CDC then you do have to query the database on a polling interval. For query-based vs log-based CDC see this blog or talk.
One option would be to use the Kafka Connect REST API to control the connector - but you're kind of going against the streaming paradigm here and will start to find awkward edges in doing this. For example, when do you decide to pause the connector? How do you determine that it's ingested all the changes? etc.
Using log-based CDC is low-impact on the source system and commonly the route that people go.
Kafka Connect does not run on your Kafka cluster. Kafka Connect runs as its own cluster. Physically, it can be co-located for purposes of dev/sandbox environment (this ref arch is useful for production). See also this talk "Running Kafka Connect".
So in your example, "Cluster B" is actually a Kafka Connect cluster - and it would be configured to read from Kafka cluster "A", and that is fine.
I have a critical Kafka application that needs to be up and running all the time. The source topics are created by debezium kafka connect for mysql binlog. Unfortunately, many things can go wrong with this setup. A lot of times debezium connectors fail and need to be restarted, so does my apps then (because without throwing any exception it just hangs up and stops consuming). My manual way of testing and discovering the failure is checking kibana log, then consume the suspicious topic through terminal. I can mimic this in code but obviously no way the best practice. I wonder if there is the ability in KafkaStream api that allows me to do such health check, and check other parts of kafka cluster?
Another point that bothers me is if I can keep the stream alive and rejoin the topics when connectors are up again.
You can check the Kafka Streams State to see if it is rebalancing/running, which would indicate healthy operations. Although, if no data is getting into the Topology, I would assume there would be no errors happening, so you need to then lookup the health of your upstream dependencies.
Overall, sounds like you might want to invest some time into using monitoring tools like Consul or Sensu which can run local service health checks and send out alerts when services go down. Or at the very least Elasticseach alerting
As far as Kafka health checking goes, you can do that in several ways
Is the broker and zookeeper process running? (SSH to the node, check processes)
Is the broker and zookeeper ports open? (use Socket connection)
Are there important JMX metrics you can track? (Metricbeat)
Can you find an active Controller broker (use AdminClient#describeCluster)
Are there a required minimum number of brokers you would like to respond as part of the Controller metadata (which can be obtained from AdminClient)
Are the topics that you use having the proper configuration? (retention, min-isr, replication-factor, partition count, etc)? (again, use AdminClient)
For a cross network confluent platform, we have one kafka cluster on-premise and another on AWS in which data is replicated from on-prem to AWS using mirror maker. Both clusters are independent with their own schema-registry, rest proxy and connect.Both clusters have different set of producers and consumers and selective topics are being mirrored between clusters.
What should be the best practice to deploy schema-registry ? Should we have one master (say on-premise) and others as non-eligible masters on on-prem and AWS ?
We suspect schema-registry can have issues with respect to schema ids when topics are replicated between clusters and we have 2 masters (aws and onprem).
Thanks!
If you use two different master registries, I find that would be difficult to manage. (See mistake #2 for self-managed registries). The purpose of master.eligble=false on a second instance/cluster is that all ID registration events have a single source of truth. As the docs say, The Schema Registry nodes in both datacenters link to the primary Kafka cluster in DC A, so you would need to establish a valid network link between AWS and onprem, anyway.
Otherwise, with multiple masters, you will need to mirror the schemas topic if you want exact same subjects and schema ids between environments. However, this is primarily meant to be used as a backup, and you would eventually run into conflicting schema IDs for any producer in the destination region pushing schemas to the other master. Hence why the first diagram shows only consumers in the remote datacenter.
If you do not do this, then let's say you mirrored a topic from cluster A to cluster B, and the consumer used registry B in the settings, it would attempt to lookup an ID from registry A (which is embedded in the message), and that either would not exist or would be an incorrect ID for the topic being read.
I wrote a Kafka Connect plugin to work around that issue by registering a new ID in a remote master registry - https://github.com/cricket007/schema-registry-transfer-smt , though you said you're using MirrorMaker, so you would need to take the logic there and apply it to the MessageHandler interface in MirrorMaker
I've really only worked with one master, on-prem, and in AWS, the registry settings have Zookeeper connection pointing to the on-prem cluster settings.
And we don't mirror everything as the docs suggest, only specific topics. The purpose of using Replicator rather than MirrorMaker is that consumer failover is better supported, rather than simply getting data "over the wire", your clients are less dependent upon where they are running as well.
I am facing the below issue on changing some properties related to kafka and re-starting the cluster.
In kafka Consumer, there were 5 consumer jobs are running .
If we make some important property change , and on restarting cluster some/all the existing consumer jobs are not able to start.
Ideally all the consumer jobs should start ,
since it will take the meta-data info from the below System-topics .
config.storage.topic
offset.storage.topic
status.storage.topic
First, a bit of background. Kafka stores all of its data in topics, but those topics (or rather the partitions that make up a topic) are append-only logs that would grow forever unless something is done. To prevent this, Kafka has the ability to clean up topics in two ways: retention and compaction. Topics configured to use retention will retain data for a configurable length of time: the broker is free to remove any log messages that are older than this. Topics configured to use compaction require every message have a key, and the broker will always retain the last known message for every distinct key. Compaction is extremely handy when each message (i.e., key/value pair) represents the last known state for the key; since consumers are reading the topic to get the last known state for each key, they will eventually get to that last state a bit faster if older states are removed.
Which cleanup policy a broker will use for a topic depends on several things. Every topic created implicitly or explicitly will use retention by default, though you can change a couple of ways:
change the globally log.cleanup.policy broker setting, affecting only topics created after that point; or
specify the cleanup.policy topic-specific setting when you create or modify a topic
Now, Kafka Connect uses several internal topics to store connector configurations, offsets, and status information. These internal topics must be compacted topics so that (at least) the last configuration, offset, and status for each connector are always available. Since Kafka Connect never uses older configurations, offsets, and status, it's actually a good thing for the broker to remove them from the internal topics.
Before Kafka 0.11.0.0, the recommended process is to manually create these internal topics using the correct topic-specific settings. You could rely upon the broker to auto-create them, but that is problematic for several reasons, not the least of which is that the three internal topics should have different numbers of partitions.
If these internal topics are not compacted, the configurations, offsets, and status info will be cleaned up and removed after the retention period has elapsed. By default this retention period is 24 hours! That means that if you restart Kafka Connect more than 24 hours after deploying / updating a connector configuration, that connector's configuration may have been purged and it will appear as if the connector configuration never existed.
So, if you didn't create these internal topics correctly, simply use the topic admin tool to update the topic's settings as described in the documentation.
BTW, not properly creating these internal topics is a very common problem, so much so that Kafka Connect 0.11.0.0 will be able to automatically create these internal topics using the correct settings without relying upon broker auto-creation of topics.
In 0.11.0 you will still have to rely upon manual creation or broker auto-creation for topics that source connectors write to. This is not ideal, and so there's a proposal to change Kafka Connect to automatically create the topics for the source connectors while giving the source connectors control over the settings. Hopefully that improvement makes it into 0.11.1.0 so that Kafka Connect is even easier to use.