You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to jira@kafka.apache.org by "Peter Davis (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2020/07/07 18:48:00 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (KAFKA-8770) Either switch to or add an option
for emit-on-change
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8770?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17152978#comment-17152978 ]
Peter Davis commented on KAFKA-8770:
------------------------------------
Could I request this Jira be split (or new one being created) to reflect the portion being completed in [2.6|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=152113430] vs. the remainder?
What is the PR showing exactly what's going out in 2.6 for KTable Sources?
> Either switch to or add an option for emit-on-change
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-8770
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8770
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: streams
> Reporter: John Roesler
> Priority: Major
> Labels: needs-kip
>
> Currently, Streams offers two emission models:
> * emit-on-window-close: (using Suppression)
> * emit-on-update: (i.e., emit a new result whenever a new record is processed, regardless of whether the result has changed)
> There is also an option to drop some intermediate results, either using caching or suppression.
> However, there is no support for emit-on-change, in which results would be forwarded only if the result has changed. This has been reported to be extremely valuable as a performance optimizations for some high-traffic applications, and it reduces the computational burden both internally for downstream Streams operations, as well as for external systems that consume the results, and currently have to deal with a lot of "no-op" changes.
> It would be pretty straightforward to implement this, by loading the prior results before a stateful operation and comparing with the new result before persisting or forwarding. In many cases, we load the prior result anyway, so it may not be a significant performance impact either.
> One design challenge is what to do with timestamps. If we get one record at time 1 that produces a result, and then another at time 2 that produces a no-op, what should be the timestamp of the result, 1 or 2? emit-on-change would require us to say 1.
> Clearly, we'd need to do some serious benchmarks to evaluate any potential implementation of emit-on-change.
> Another design challenge is to decide if we should just automatically provide emit-on-change for stateful operators, or if it should be configurable. Configuration increases complexity, so unless the performance impact is high, we may just want to change the emission model without a configuration.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)