Skip to content

KAFKA-13255: use exclude filter for new topics #11401

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
mimaison merged 7 commits into from
Nov 15, 2021
Merged

KAFKA-13255: use exclude filter for new topics #11401

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6a4cffc
KAFKA-13255: use exclude filter for new topics
bdesert Oct 14, 2021
57cfc24
KAFKA-13255: add test for property exclude filter
bdesert Oct 29, 2021
b9d415d
adding exclude topic config integrated test
bdesert Oct 29, 2021
75ff17c
adding exclude topic config unit test test
bdesert Nov 3, 2021
3d87dff
adding exclude topic config unit test test
bdesert Nov 4, 2021
2d52d51
integration test updates include simplification and order change sugg…
bdesert Nov 8, 2021
3ba6d6c
integration test fix for IdentityReplication and optimizing the test …
bdesert Nov 9, 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
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion connect/mirror/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/connect/mirror/MirrorSourceConnector.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ private void createNewTopics(Set<String> newSourceTopics, Map<String, Long> sour
.map(sourceTopic -> {
String remoteTopic = formatRemoteTopic(sourceTopic);
int partitionCount = sourceTopicToPartitionCounts.get(sourceTopic).intValue();
Map<String, String> configs = configToMap(sourceTopicToConfig.get(sourceTopic));
Map<String, String> configs = configToMap(targetConfig(sourceTopicToConfig.get(sourceTopic)));
return new NewTopic(remoteTopic, partitionCount, (short) replicationFactor)
.configs(configs);
})
Expand Down
38 changes: 38 additions & 0 deletions connect/mirror/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/connect/mirror/MirrorSourceConnectorTest.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -152,6 +152,44 @@ public void testConfigPropertyFiltering() {
.anyMatch(x -> x.name().equals("min.insync.replicas")), "should not replicate excluded properties");
}

@Test
public void testConfigPropertyFilteringExclude() {

@mimaison mimaison Oct 29, 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.

Even without the code change, this test is passing. It's because it's calling connector.targetConfig() while the fix is in createNewTopics().

@bdesert bdesert Oct 29, 2021 •
edited
Loading

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.

@mimaison, thanks for the comments. Makes perfect sense.
I'm adding integration test to address your suggestion.
Along with that, i'm still keeping the unitTest committed before, so it will test configuration filtering logic without integration. The method I've added to unitTest follows the suit of the very previous test testConfigPropertyFiltering, which tests default exclude list this particular way.


Map<String, Object> mmConfig = new HashMap<>();
mmConfig.put(DefaultConfigPropertyFilter.CONFIG_PROPERTIES_EXCLUDE_CONFIG, "follower\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "
+ "leader\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "
+ "message\\.timestamp\\.difference\\.max\\.ms, "
+ "message\\.timestamp\\.type, "
+ "unclean\\.leader\\.election\\.enable, "
+ "min\\.insync\\.replicas,"
+ "exclude_param.*");

DefaultConfigPropertyFilter filter = new DefaultConfigPropertyFilter();
filter.configure(mmConfig);

MirrorSourceConnector connector = new MirrorSourceConnector(new SourceAndTarget("source", "target"),
new DefaultReplicationPolicy(), x -> true, filter);
ArrayList<ConfigEntry> entries = new ArrayList<>();
entries.add(new ConfigEntry("name-1", "value-1"));
entries.add(new ConfigEntry("exclude_param.param1", "value-param1"));
entries.add(new ConfigEntry("min.insync.replicas", "2"));
Config config = new Config(entries);
Config targetConfig = connector.targetConfig(config);

// property 'name-1' isn't defined in the exclude filter -> should be replicated
assertTrue(targetConfig.entries().stream().anyMatch(x -> x.name().equals("name-1")),
"should replicate properties");

// this property is in default list, just double check it:
String prop1 = "min.insync.replicas";
assertFalse(targetConfig.entries().stream().anyMatch(x -> x.name().equals(prop1)),
"should not replicate excluded properties " + prop1);
// this property is only in exclude filter custom parameter, also tests regex on the way:
String prop2 = "exclude_param.param1";
assertFalse(targetConfig.entries().stream().anyMatch(x -> x.name().equals(prop2)),
"should not replicate excluded properties " + prop2);
}

@mimaison mimaison Nov 4, 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 agree that calling verify on targetConfig() is not the best. But I think we should call verify on createNewTopics(any()) to ensure our mocked method, and the assertions, actually run.

@bdesert bdesert Nov 4, 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.

agree. with a small correction of createNewTopics(any(), any()). since the targetConfig() is being called from overloaded method with two params.

@mimaison mimaison Nov 8, 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.

Ah right, the code we changed is actually in createNewTopics(any(), any()). As we explicitly call that method ourselves, I don't think the verify call adds a lot of value. But I think it's fine, it shouldn't hurt


@Test
public void testMirrorSourceConnectorTaskConfig() {
List<TopicPartition> knownSourceTopicPartitions = new ArrayList<>();
Expand Down
43 changes: 43 additions & 0 deletions ...java/org/apache/kafka/connect/mirror/integration/MirrorConnectorsIntegrationBaseTest.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
import org.apache.kafka.common.utils.Exit;
import org.apache.kafka.common.TopicPartition;
import org.apache.kafka.connect.connector.Connector;
import org.apache.kafka.connect.mirror.DefaultConfigPropertyFilter;
import org.apache.kafka.connect.mirror.MirrorClient;
import org.apache.kafka.connect.mirror.MirrorHeartbeatConnector;
import org.apache.kafka.connect.mirror.MirrorMakerConfig;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -60,6 +61,7 @@
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;

import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertNotEquals;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertFalse;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertTrue;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertNotNull;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -519,6 +521,47 @@ public void testOffsetSyncsTopicsOnTarget() throws Exception {
assertFalse(primaryTopics.contains("mm2-offset-syncs." + BACKUP_CLUSTER_ALIAS + ".internal"));
}

@Test

@mimaison mimaison Nov 3, 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.

Instead of an integration test, what about adding a test like this to MirrorSourceConnectorTest:

@Test
public void testNewTopicConfigs() throws Exception {
    Map<String, Object> mmConfig = new HashMap<>();
    mmConfig.put(DefaultConfigPropertyFilter.CONFIG_PROPERTIES_EXCLUDE_CONFIG, "follower\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "
            + "leader\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "
            + "message\\.timestamp\\.difference\\.max\\.ms, "
            + "message\\.timestamp\\.type, "
            + "unclean\\.leader\\.election\\.enable, "
            + "min\\.insync\\.replicas,"
            + "exclude_param.*");
    DefaultConfigPropertyFilter filter = new DefaultConfigPropertyFilter();
    filter.configure(mmConfig);

    MirrorSourceConnector connector = spy(new MirrorSourceConnector(new SourceAndTarget("source", "target"),
            new DefaultReplicationPolicy(), x -> true, filter));

    String topic = "testtopic";
    List<ConfigEntry> entries = new ArrayList<>();
    entries.add(new ConfigEntry("name-1", "value-1"));
    entries.add(new ConfigEntry("exclude_param.param1", "value-param1"));
    entries.add(new ConfigEntry("min.insync.replicas", "2"));
    Config config = new Config(entries);
    doReturn(Collections.singletonMap(topic, config)).when(connector).describeTopicConfigs(any());
    doAnswer(invocation -> {
        Map<String, NewTopic> newTopics = invocation.getArgument(0);
        assertNotNull(newTopics.get("source." + topic));
        Map<String, String> targetConfig = newTopics.get("source." + topic).configs();

        // property 'name-1' isn't defined in the exclude filter -> should be replicated
        assertNotNull(targetConfig.get("name-1"), "should replicate properties");

        // this property is in default list, just double check it:
        String prop1 = "min.insync.replicas";
        assertNull(targetConfig.get(prop1), "should not replicate excluded properties " + prop1);
        // this property is only in exclude filter custom parameter, also tests regex on the way:
        String prop2 = "exclude_param.param1";
        assertNull(targetConfig.get(prop2), "should not replicate excluded properties " + prop2);
        return null;
    }).when(connector).createNewTopics(any());
    connector.createNewTopics(Collections.singleton(topic), Collections.singletonMap(topic, 1L));
    verify(connector).targetConfig(config);
}

What do you think?

@bdesert bdesert Nov 3, 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 I've had to check Mockito usage before.

This makes sense, really appreciate the help. Except for last line. Not sure why we have to add hard dependency on targetConfig invocation, if assertions in doAnswer provide full test coverage. I'll submit without the verify, let me know if disagree, then I'll add verify line.

Also adding a change to the connector class itself, as it needs a visibility change for this test. And still gonna keep integration test to follow the existing approach.

Fully retested with ./gradlew connect:mirror:test

public void testTopicConfigPropertyFilteringExclude() throws Exception {
// create exclude filter configuration and start MM2:
mm2Props.put(BACKUP_CLUSTER_ALIAS + "->" + PRIMARY_CLUSTER_ALIAS + ".enabled", "false");
mm2Props.put(DefaultConfigPropertyFilter.CONFIG_PROPERTIES_EXCLUDE_CONFIG, "follower\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "

@mimaison mimaison Nov 8, 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.

To keep the test as simple as needed, what about simply using:

mm2Props.put(DefaultConfigPropertyFilter.CONFIG_PROPERTIES_EXCLUDE_CONFIG, "delete.retention.ms");

+ "leader\\.replication\\.throttled\\.replicas, "
+ "message\\.timestamp\\.difference\\.max\\.ms, "
+ "message\\.timestamp\\.type, "
+ "unclean\\.leader\\.election\\.enable, "
+ "min\\.insync\\.replicas,"
+ "delete\\.retention\\..*"); // this is in addition to the default exclude list

mm2Config = new MirrorMakerConfig(mm2Props);
waitUntilMirrorMakerIsRunning(backup, CONNECTOR_LIST, mm2Config, PRIMARY_CLUSTER_ALIAS, BACKUP_CLUSTER_ALIAS);

// create topic with configuration to test:
final Map<String, String> topicConfig = new HashMap<>();
topicConfig.put("delete.retention.ms", "1000"); // should be excluded (default value is 86400000)
topicConfig.put("retention.bytes", "1000"); // should be included, default value is -1


final String topic = "test-topic-with-config";
primary.kafka().createTopic(topic, NUM_PARTITIONS, 1, topicConfig);
waitForTopicCreated(backup, PRIMARY_CLUSTER_ALIAS + "." + topic);

String primaryConfig, backupConfig;

primaryConfig = getTopicConfig(primary.kafka(), topic, "delete.retention.ms");
backupConfig = getTopicConfig(backup.kafka(), PRIMARY_CLUSTER_ALIAS + "." + topic, "delete.retention.ms");
assertNotEquals(primaryConfig, backupConfig,
"`delete.retention.ms` should be different, because it's in exclude filter! ");

// regression test for the config that are still supposed to be replicated
primaryConfig = getTopicConfig(primary.kafka(), topic, "retention.bytes");
backupConfig = getTopicConfig(backup.kafka(), PRIMARY_CLUSTER_ALIAS + "." + topic, "retention.bytes");
assertEquals(primaryConfig, backupConfig,
"`retention.bytes` should be the same, because it isn't in exclude filter! ");
assertEquals(backupConfig, "1000",
"`retention.bytes` should be the same, because it's explicitly defined! ");

@mimaison mimaison Nov 8, 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.

should be the same -> should be 1000
Also let's swap the arguments as the expected value should come first:

assertEquals("1000", backupConfig, ...

@bdesert bdesert Nov 8, 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.

updated per suggestions

}

/*
* launch the connectors on kafka connect cluster and check if they are running
*/
Expand Down