Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka >> mail # user >> 7.1 support for List<ProducerData>


Copy link to this message
-
Re: 7.1 support for List<ProducerData>
I think the difference is merely that async publishing is a non-blocking
call, whereas sync publishing is a blocking call, meaning that the code
that does a sync publish call could choose to have an alternate behavior if
the publish failed, whereas the code that does an async publish would never
know whether the publish succeeded or not.

But like I said, in both cases, you can configure the batching size at the
producer level, and a batching size greater than 1 will provide you with
better throughput capabilities... In fact, I think this is the canonical
use case Kafka was originally built for.

--
Felix

On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:24 PM, will martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> My understanding is that async is not meant to be an immediate send. As to
> batching, I've not delved into the code differences.
>
> But batching the sync is not possible at the Producer higher level; at
> least that's what I've tried and had no success with, the default and
> string encoders cannot handle lists, although the documentation suggests
> they can.
>
> I'm glad to be wrong on this; but I've had no luck with the serializer deep
> in scala code tree accepting a composite of any type containing either
> Message or String.  I can batch myself, but doubt this is what any of us
> think is the design goal?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Felix GV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This may not be entirely related to what you're talking about, but why
> > would an async producer not be able to meet your throughput needs, and a
> > sync producer be able to?
> >
> > Both sync and async producers can be configured to batch more than one
> > message together, and that's pretty much the main thing that's required
> to
> > be able to achieve good throughput, AFAIK.
> >
> > ...?
> >
> > --
> > Felix
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:49 PM, will martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Neha. All my data is of 1 type. The serializer in place doesn't
> > seem
> > > to handle an array of String.
> > >
> > > The ProducerData I use is a collection of same types of data wrapped
> in a
> > > single defintion, according to as I read spec.  Am I to understand
> that,
> > > having a producer batch records itself is unsupported?  The async
> > producer
> > > can't meet my throughput needs and as I understand is targetted at
> > implicit
> > > load balancing among different client machines.
> > >
> > > Additionally, the sync producer can meet my needs, but requires more
> use
> > of
> > > the lower-level design features. For maintenance, it'd be great if I
> > could
> > > create a list of Strings, create a ProducerData<String, List<String>>
> and
> > > have this be serialized.
> > >
> > > It occurs to me that the described  serialization may need my
> attention?
> > >
> > > Thx
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Neha Narkhede <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > The producer takes in a "serializer.class" config that it uses to
> > > > serialize data sent by the Producer. A Producer instance is tied to
> > > > the type of data it is sending, so you won't be able to send data
> > > > belonging to diverse types using the same Producer object.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Neha
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:02 AM, will martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > This use case is defined by the following snippet from the Design
> > > section
> > > > > of the doc pages.
> > > > >
> > > > > class Producer {
> > > > >
> > > > > public void send (ProducerData)
> > > > >
> > > > > public void send (List<ProducerData>)
> > > > >
> > > > > public void close()
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > I've tried various composites for the List<ProducerData> argument,
> > > > > including strings and Messages. All of these throw serialization
> > errors
> > > > > deep in the engine.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is the list form of send supported in 7.1?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance,
> > > > > mmartin