Skip to content

MINOR: Improve confusing admin client shutdown logging #10107

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
hachikuji merged 2 commits into from
Feb 11, 2021
Merged

MINOR: Improve confusing admin client shutdown logging #10107

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6b30cce
MINOR: Improve confusing admin client shutdown logging
hachikuji Feb 11, 2021
f9a9e63
address review comments
hachikuji Feb 11, 2021
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
21 changes: 15 additions & 6 deletions clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/admin/KafkaAdminClient.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ public void close(Duration timeout) {
// Wait for the thread to be joined.
thread.join(waitTimeMs);
}
log.debug("Kafka admin client closed.");
log.info("Kafka admin client closed.");

@dajac dajac Feb 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if changing this log level is really necessary. What's the rational behind it?

@hachikuji hachikuji Feb 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it is helpful to get at least one log message at info level in shutdown. Really at the start of shutdown is best since it triggers logic which can be difficult to explain if you don't know shutdown is taking place. Anyway, let me remove this change here and I can open a separate patch so that we can do this consistently in all the clients.

} catch (InterruptedException e) {
log.debug("Interrupted while joining I/O thread", e);
Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -756,6 +756,11 @@ protected Node curNode() {
return curNode;
}

void abortAndFail(Throwable throwable) {

@chia7712 chia7712 Feb 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How about changing the input type from Throwable to TimeoutException? The exception passed to this method should NOT be wrapped by TimeoutException. Using explicit type (TimeoutException) can prevent us from passing incorrect exception in the future.

@hachikuji hachikuji Feb 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense.

this.aborted = true;
fail(time.milliseconds(), throwable);
}

/**
* Handle a failure.
*
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -818,8 +823,12 @@ private void failWithTimeout(long now, Throwable cause) {
log.debug("{} timed out at {} after {} attempt(s)", this, now, tries,
new Exception(prettyPrintException(cause)));
}
handleFailure(new TimeoutException(this + " timed out at " + now
+ " after " + tries + " attempt(s)", cause));
if (cause instanceof TimeoutException) {
handleFailure(cause);
} else {
handleFailure(new TimeoutException(this + " timed out at " + now
+ " after " + tries + " attempt(s)", cause));
}
}

/**
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1130,7 +1139,7 @@ private void timeoutCallsInFlight(TimeoutProcessor processor) {
if (call.aborted) {
log.warn("Aborted call {} is still in callsInFlight.", call);
} else {
log.debug("Closing connection to {} to time out {}", nodeId, call);
log.debug("Closing connection to {} due to timeout while awaiting {}", nodeId, call);
call.aborted = true;
client.disconnect(nodeId);
numTimedOut++;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1375,7 +1384,7 @@ void enqueue(Call call, long now) {
client.wakeup(); // wake the thread if it is in poll()
} else {
log.debug("The AdminClient thread has exited. Timing out {}.", call);
call.fail(Long.MAX_VALUE, new TimeoutException("The AdminClient thread has exited."));
call.abortAndFail(new TimeoutException("The AdminClient thread has exited."));
}
}

Expand All @@ -1390,7 +1399,7 @@ void enqueue(Call call, long now) {
void call(Call call, long now) {
if (hardShutdownTimeMs.get() != INVALID_SHUTDOWN_TIME) {
log.debug("The AdminClient is not accepting new calls. Timing out {}.", call);
call.fail(Long.MAX_VALUE, new TimeoutException("The AdminClient thread is not accepting new calls."));
call.abortAndFail(new TimeoutException("The AdminClient thread is not accepting new calls."));
} else {
enqueue(call, now);
}
Expand Down