-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
KAFKA-16541 Fix potential leader-epoch checkpoint file corruption #15993
Merged
Merged
Changes from 9 commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7345138
KAFKA-16541 Fix potential leader-epoch checkpoint file corruption
ocadaruma 7906024
add test
ocadaruma 79c26e9
address comments
ocadaruma 90dc497
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/trunk' into kafka-16541
ocadaruma 0937e5a
handle concurrent topic deletion
ocadaruma 7513f76
address checkstyle issues
ocadaruma c1def6a
address feedback
ocadaruma 482c80c
address feedback
ocadaruma 4f6332d
RLM needs synchronous flush
ocadaruma 22be0ba
fix indirect truncation for RLM
ocadaruma c231aa0
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/trunk' into kafka-16541
ocadaruma c24f949
fix conflict
ocadaruma 2a4ef5c
address feedbacks
ocadaruma File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This makes the code a bit hard to understand. I am wondering if we could improve it. The existing usage of
InMemoryLeaderEpochCheckpoint
is kind of awkward. Its only purpose is to get a list of epoch entries fromLEaderEpochCache
within a specified offset range. But the way that it achieves the goal is indirect and complicated.Instead of using
InMemoryLeaderEpochCheckpoint
, perhaps we could add a new method likeList<EpochEntry> epochEntriesInRange(long startOffset, long endOffset)
inLeaderEpochCache
that returns a list of epoch entries within startOffset and endOffset. Then, we could pull the logic inreadAsByteBuffer.InMemoryLeaderEpochCheckpoint()
to a static method. This way, we don't need to add theflushSync
option intruncateFromStart()
and can get rid ofInMemoryLeaderEpochCheckpoint
. What do you think? cc @satishdThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agree. I +1 for adding a method for directly retrieve necessary epoch entries for RLM.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@junrao Thank you for pointing out. I removed InMemoryLeaderEpochCheckpoint (and LeaderEpochCheckpoint interface as well) and refactored the PR based on that.