You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by Hu Xi <hu...@hotmail.com> on 2017/09/07 03:42:41 UTC

A quick question on StickyAssignor

Hello Dev,
I am a little confused about the statement below in KIP-54 (StickyAssignor things):


  *   if a consumer A has 2+ fewer topic partitions assigned to it compared to another consumer B, none of the topic partitions assigned to B can be assigned to A.

Is it a typo or do I misunderstand anything? Why partitions assigned to B cannot be reassigned to A in such a situation when A has fewer partitions than B? What're the thoughts under this design? Thanks.

答复: A quick question on StickyAssignor

Posted by Hu Xi <hu...@hotmail.com>.

Thanks Hashemian. It's clear to me now 😊

________________________________
发件人: Vahid S Hashemian <va...@us.ibm.com>
发送时间: 2017年9月7日 12:41
收件人: dev@kafka.apache.org
主题: Re: A quick question on StickyAssignor

Hi Hu Xi,

This is a typo. It should read

if a consumer A has 2+ fewer topic partitions assigned to it compared to
another consumer B, none of the topic partitions assigned to A can be
assigned to B.

For this assignor, the partition movement should not widen the existing
balance gap among consumers.

Thanks for catching it. I'll fix the typo in the KIP to avoid further
confusion.

--Vahid



From:   Hu Xi <hu...@hotmail.com>
To:     "dev@kafka.apache.org" <de...@kafka.apache.org>
Date:   09/06/2017 08:42 PM
Subject:        A quick question on StickyAssignor



Hello Dev,
I am a little confused about the statement below in KIP-54 (StickyAssignor
things):


  *   if a consumer A has 2+ fewer topic partitions assigned to it
compared to another consumer B, none of the topic partitions assigned to B
can be assigned to A.

Is it a typo or do I misunderstand anything? Why partitions assigned to B
cannot be reassigned to A in such a situation when A has fewer partitions
than B? What're the thoughts under this design? Thanks.

Re: A quick question on StickyAssignor

Posted by Vahid S Hashemian <va...@us.ibm.com>.

Hi Hu Xi,

This is a typo. It should read

if a consumer A has 2+ fewer topic partitions assigned to it compared to 
another consumer B, none of the topic partitions assigned to A can be 
assigned to B.

For this assignor, the partition movement should not widen the existing 
balance gap among consumers.

Thanks for catching it. I'll fix the typo in the KIP to avoid further 
confusion.

--Vahid



From:   Hu Xi <hu...@hotmail.com>
To:     "dev@kafka.apache.org" <de...@kafka.apache.org>
Date:   09/06/2017 08:42 PM
Subject:        A quick question on StickyAssignor



Hello Dev,
I am a little confused about the statement below in KIP-54 (StickyAssignor 
things):


  *   if a consumer A has 2+ fewer topic partitions assigned to it 
compared to another consumer B, none of the topic partitions assigned to B 
can be assigned to A.

Is it a typo or do I misunderstand anything? Why partitions assigned to B 
cannot be reassigned to A in such a situation when A has fewer partitions 
than B? What're the thoughts under this design? Thanks.