-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.6k
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-16566: Fix consumer static membership system test with new protocol #15738
Merged
lucasbru
merged 3 commits into
apache:trunk
from
lianetm:fix-consumer-sys-test-static-member
Apr 19, 2024
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Do we anticipate any timing issues here? That is, will
num_rebalances()
andjoined_nodes()
be "guaranteed" to return the correct values immediately after the call toawait_consumed_messages()
is finished? Or do we want to wrap those assertions aswait_until()
s to give them a few seconds to coalesce to the correct value?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.
There should be no timing issues as I see it. For the
consumer.joined_nodes
there is a previousself.await_members
, that ensures that we wait for the time needed for all the nodes to join. As for theconflict_consumer.joined_nodes()
, its for nodes that never joined, we're just asserting that after the non-conflicting remained without rebalance, consuming (ensuring activity), the conflicting ones did not join. Makes sense?