kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Arthur <mum...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Clients and partition leaders
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:08:52 GMT
Thanks, Jun, this answers my questions.

I wasn't necessarily thinking of an HTTP interface like Solr, but rather 
the way it routes requests to leaders. However, since brokers are not 
aware of all the partition leaders, then the Solr approach will not work.

I actually worked a bit on a REST interface a while ago: 
https://github.com/mumrah/kafka/tree/rest/contrib/rest-proxy, once 0.8 
is out I might pick it up and clean it up a bit.

-David


On 2/12/13 9:44 AM, Jun Rao wrote:
> David,
>
> The benefit of the strategy used in Solr is that it simplifies client
> routing. The downside is potential additional RPC overhead and a bit more
> logic in the server. Technically, you can achieve what Solr does in the
> client layer too. You can run a proxy that runs the java version of Kafka
> producer and exposes a restful api. Then, your non-java client can talk to
> the proxy.
>
> We do plan to support a restful api for the producer in the future. Doing
> the Solr strategy needs more thinking since currently, not every broker
> knows the leader of all partitions.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jun
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: David Arthur <mumrah@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:45 AM
> Subject: Clients and replica leaders
> To: "dev@kafka.apache.org" <dev@kafka.apache.org>
>
>
> In writing a client for 0.8, I now have to keep state of which
> topic+partition is owned by what broker. This is inherently a pain to deal
> with and has the downside that I must wait for an error before I am
> notified about a change in the broker topology.
>
> I would be nice if the clients didn't need to know so much about the
> brokers. In Apache Solr, which actually has a similar partition+replication
> strategy, each server (broker) can handle requests for any shard
> (partition) in the cluster. If the current server happens to be the leader
> then it will process the request; if not it will forward it to the correct
> server, wait for a response, then forward the response back to the client.
>
> Dumb clients will pay the extra cost of the additional hop, but do not need
> to know anything about the brokers. Smart clients will work basically like
> they would now with the added benefit of not getting an error when leader
> changes.
>
> Would a strategy like this work in 0.8? Do the brokers know about one
> another?
>
> -David
>


Mime
View raw message