-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.5k
KAFKA-17019: Producer TimeoutException should include root cause #20159
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
base: trunk
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 3 commits
c0d4a19
0667079
abc86a6
66215de
0e5dbdb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.InterruptException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.InvalidTopicException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.InvalidTxnStateException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.PotentialCauseException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.ProducerFencedException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.RecordTooLargeException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
import org.apache.kafka.common.errors.RetriableException; | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@@ -671,7 +672,8 @@ public void initTransactions(boolean keepPreparedTxn) { | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
long now = time.nanoseconds(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TransactionalRequestResult result = transactionManager.initializeTransactions(keepPreparedTxn); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sender.wakeup(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
() -> new PotentialCauseException("InitTransactions timed out – could not discover the transaction coordinator or receive the InitProducerId response within max.block.ms (broker unavailable, network lag, or ACL denial).")); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
producerMetrics.recordInit(time.nanoseconds() - now); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
transactionManager.maybeUpdateTransactionV2Enabled(true); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@@ -760,7 +762,8 @@ public void sendOffsetsToTransaction(Map<TopicPartition, OffsetAndMetadata> offs | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
long start = time.nanoseconds(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TransactionalRequestResult result = transactionManager.sendOffsetsToTransaction(offsets, groupMetadata); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sender.wakeup(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
() -> new PotentialCauseException("SendOffsetsToTransaction timed out – unable to reach the consumer-group or transaction coordinator or to receive the TxnOffsetCommit/AddOffsetsToTxn response within max.block.ms (coordinator unavailable, rebalance in progress, network/ACL issue).")); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
producerMetrics.recordSendOffsets(time.nanoseconds() - start); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@@ -845,7 +848,8 @@ public void commitTransaction() throws ProducerFencedException { | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
long commitStart = time.nanoseconds(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TransactionalRequestResult result = transactionManager.beginCommit(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sender.wakeup(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
() -> new PotentialCauseException("CommitTransaction timed out – failed to complete EndTxn with the transaction coordinator within max.block.ms (coordinator unavailable, network lag, ACL/rebalance).")); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
producerMetrics.recordCommitTxn(time.nanoseconds() - commitStart); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@@ -880,7 +884,8 @@ public void abortTransaction() throws ProducerFencedException { | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
long abortStart = time.nanoseconds(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TransactionalRequestResult result = transactionManager.beginAbort(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sender.wakeup(); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
result.await(maxBlockTimeMs, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
() -> new PotentialCauseException("AbortTransaction timed out – could not complete EndTxn(abort) with the transaction coordinator within max.block.ms (coordinator unavailable/rebalancing, network lag, or ACL denial).")); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
producerMetrics.recordAbortTxn(time.nanoseconds() - abortStart); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@@ -1225,7 +1230,9 @@ private ClusterAndWaitTime waitOnMetadata(String topic, Integer partition, long | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
if (metadata.getError(topic) != null) { | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
throw new TimeoutException(errorMessage, metadata.getError(topic).exception()); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
} | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
throw new TimeoutException(errorMessage); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
if (ex.getCause() != null) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
throw new TimeoutException(errorMessage, ex.getCause()); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
throw new TimeoutException(errorMessage, new PotentialCauseException("Metadata update timed out ― topic missing, auth denied, broker/partition unavailable, or client sender/buffer stalled.")); | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It seems There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @chia7712 thanks for your comment. 🙇♂️ Let me explain more. The It’s hard to pinpoint the root cause in every situation where a
|
accumulator.resetNextBatchExpiryTime(); | |
List<ProducerBatch> expiredInflightBatches = getExpiredInflightBatches(now); | |
List<ProducerBatch> expiredBatches = this.accumulator.expiredBatches(now); | |
expiredBatches.addAll(expiredInflightBatches); | |
// Reset the producer id if an expired batch has previously been sent to the broker. Also update the metrics | |
// for expired batches. see the documentation of @TransactionState.resetIdempotentProducerId to understand why | |
// we need to reset the producer id here. | |
if (!expiredBatches.isEmpty()) | |
log.trace("Expired {} batches in accumulator", expiredBatches.size()); | |
for (ProducerBatch expiredBatch : expiredBatches) { | |
String errorMessage = "Expiring " + expiredBatch.recordCount + " record(s) for " + expiredBatch.topicPartition | |
+ ":" + (now - expiredBatch.createdMs) + " ms has passed since batch creation"; | |
failBatch(expiredBatch, new TimeoutException(errorMessage), false); |
In here, expiredInflightBatches
and expiredBatches
can cause TimeoutException
.
However, TimeoutException
is thrown as a result of calculating elapsed time.
Therefore, expiredInflightBatches
and expiredBatches
don't have information about root cause.
If expiredInflight
encounters some problem --
- Normal Case - No errors and succeed.
- Network Issue - Error might occurs after the expired period.
- a little bit slow network issue because of Bandwidth, and so on. - No errors and slow response.
- Busy CPU due to various reasons - No errors and called slowly.
There are many possible scenarios where a TimeoutException
can occur, even with a simple analysis.
However, the expiredInFlight
instance can actually throw an error in only 2 (Maybe connection closed, fail to establish connection, ...)
After spending a considerable amount of time reviewing the code and analyzing the TimeoutExceptions
thrown by the Producer, I concluded that it's difficult to extract the root cause at every point where a TimeoutException
is created.
Idea + Pros and Cons
Developers usually have a good understanding of what kind of error might occur in a given context.
Therefore, in cases where it's difficult to catch the actual root cause, it's possible to include an expected exception as the root cause instead.
Here’s a summary of the pros and cons (compared to simply enhancing the error message):
- pros : At call sites(For example,
kafka streams
,kafka connect
,kafka producer internal
and so on) where aTimeoutException
is expected, the root cause can be used to handle different cases conditionally.- For example, you could create
NetworkPotentialCauseException
andCPUBusyPotentialCauseException
as subclasses ofPotentialCauseException
, and handle different branches based on the root cause—branch A if the root cause is aNetworkPotentialCauseException
, and branch B if it’s aCPUBusyPotentialCauseException
.
- For example, you could create
- cons : Higher instance creation cost compared to
String
instance.
I spent quite a bit of time thinking through the direction of this PR.
What are your thoughts on it?
Please let me know. 🙇♂️
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.
thanks for your explanation. I agree that specific exception types could help developer to catch the actual root cause. My question is, do we really need PotentialCauseException
to be the base exception for NetworkPotentialCauseException
and CPUBusyPotentialCauseException
? Perhaps KafkaException
is good enough.
Another exception design uses TimeoutException
as a parent class, similar to e032a36. The benefit of this is simplifying the code, since developers wouldn't need to check root cause of a TimeoutException
from root cause of an ExecutionException
😄
thanks for bringing up this great discussion. I'd like to see kafka exception hierarchy becomr more developer-friendly.
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.
@chia7712
Thank you for considering my proposal and for sharing your valuable thoughts.
As you mentioned, I also think it’s a good idea to reuse an existing Exception class.
Personally, I think using KafkaException
would be a better approach.
Since there can be multiple potential causes for a TimeoutException
in certain code paths, it might be difficult to pinpoint the exact cause. In such cases, it could be unclear which subclass of TimeoutException
should be used. (e032a36)
So, my suggestion is as follows:
- Include a
KafkaException
as the root cause of theTimeoutException
, and describe the possible scenario in the error message of theKafkaException
. - Let the detailed error information be available via the root cause of the
TimeoutException
. - Keep the current message format of the
TimeoutException
itself (which currently only includes the elapsed time before it expired).
I’m thinking of revising the PR in this direction.
This way, I believe we can preserve the current semantics of TimeoutException
while still conveying helpful contextual information (such as a potential cause) when necessary.
In the future, if there's a need to branch logic based on a more specific cause of the timeout—even if no actual exception was thrown—then the developer could define a concrete PotentialCauseException
class as needed.
Also, if this direction sounds reasonable, I think it wouldn’t require a KIP change.
What do you think?
Please share your opinion 🙇♂️
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.
The proposal of reusing KafkaException
sounds good. +1 to it.
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.
Sounds good to me also. There's no need to create a KIP for this approach and it gives just as much information to the user.
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ | ||
/* | ||
* Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more | ||
* contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with | ||
* this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. | ||
* The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 | ||
* (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with | ||
* the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
* | ||
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
* | ||
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
* WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
* limitations under the License. | ||
*/ | ||
package org.apache.kafka.common.errors; | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* Indicates potential reason that can cause {@link TimeoutException}. | ||
*/ | ||
public class PotentialCauseException extends RetriableException { | ||
|
||
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L; | ||
|
||
public PotentialCauseException(String message) { | ||
super(message); | ||
} | ||
|
||
} |
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.
Would it be better to refactor it like this:
Also, since
ex.getCause() != null
can never be true based on the currentawaitUpdate
implementation, do we need to check for it?