Skip to content

KAFKA-17248 - KIP 1076 implementation #17021

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

Merged
merged 54 commits into from
Nov 5, 2024

Conversation

bbejeck
Copy link
Member

@bbejeck bbejeck commented Aug 27, 2024

Implementation of KIP-1076 to allow for adding client application metrics to the KIP-714 framework

Integration and unit tests forthcoming

Committer Checklist (excluded from commit message)

  • Verify design and implementation
  • Verify test coverage and CI build status
  • Verify documentation (including upgrade notes)

@bbejeck bbejeck marked this pull request as draft August 27, 2024 22:26
@bbejeck bbejeck added streams kip Requires or implements a KIP KIP-1076 Metrics for client applications KIP-714 extension labels Aug 27, 2024
@bbejeck bbejeck force-pushed the kip_1076_implementation branch from 4e8ffa7 to d390f0a Compare August 28, 2024 22:11
@bbejeck bbejeck changed the title [WIP NO MERGE] KAFKA-17248 - KIP 1076 implementation KAFKA-17248 - KIP 1076 implementation Sep 2, 2024
@bbejeck bbejeck force-pushed the kip_1076_implementation branch from 61270fb to b566d34 Compare September 3, 2024 20:27
@bbejeck bbejeck marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2024 20:33
@bbejeck bbejeck force-pushed the kip_1076_implementation branch from d6f9919 to b96b967 Compare September 4, 2024 16:28
@apoorvmittal10 apoorvmittal10 self-requested a review September 4, 2024 20:23
Copy link
Contributor

@apoorvmittal10 apoorvmittal10 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the PR @bbejeck. I have taken a pass and some comments.

@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Sep 5, 2024

Thanks for the comments @apoorvmittal10 - I've addressed your comments.

Copy link
Member

@mjsax mjsax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if I understand the end-to-end wiring already, so need to make another pass.

Btw: should we also verify state store metrics (or are they automatically verified as part of task metrics)?

@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Sep 9, 2024

should we also verify state store metrics (or are they automatically verified as part of task metrics)?

They are covered as part of task metrics, but I expanded the test to explicitly verify state store metrics are correct as well

Copy link
Member

@mjsax mjsax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the PR update. Made another pass.

@bbejeck bbejeck force-pushed the kip_1076_implementation branch from 020d7c4 to 965fd23 Compare September 13, 2024 17:00
@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Sep 13, 2024

@mjsax thanks for the second review, I've addressed your comments

@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Sep 30, 2024

@mjsax, @apoorvmittal10, @AndrewJSchofield comments addressed

Copy link
Member

@AndrewJSchofield AndrewJSchofield left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one remaining comment.

@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Oct 1, 2024

@AndrewJSchofield, thanks for the review; I've addressed your comment.

Copy link
Member

@AndrewJSchofield AndrewJSchofield left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@bbejeck bbejeck force-pushed the kip_1076_implementation branch from 623cb7b to 21667fe Compare November 2, 2024 16:53
Comment on lines +173 to +178
final List<String> expectedMetrics = streams.metrics().values().stream().map(Metric::metricName)
.filter(metricName -> metricName.tags().containsKey("thread-id")).map(mn -> {
final String name = mn.name().replace('-', '.');
final String group = mn.group().replace("-metrics", "").replace('-', '.');
return "org.apache.kafka." + group + "." + name;
}).sorted().collect(Collectors.toList());
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needed to convert the metric names into the expected KIP-714 naming format

@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Nov 2, 2024

@mjsax rebased on trunk - ready for final review


final Uuid mainConsumerInstanceId = clientInstanceIds.consumerInstanceIds().entrySet().stream()
.filter(entry -> !entry.getKey().endsWith("-restore-consumer")
&& !entry.getKey().endsWith("GlobalStreamThread"))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't use -global-consumer in the key for the global consumer?

This sounds like a bug to me -- checking the code, it seems we use getName() + "-consumer" inside StreamThread while we use getName() only for the global case inside KafkaStreams.

Out of scope for this PR, but I think we should fix it in a follow up PR (given that it is technically a breaking change, we should think about it twice though... But as we head into 4.0, it might be ok -- however, we should call it out in the upgrade docs and we need a Jira for it)

30_000,
"Never received subscribed metrics");
final List<String> actualInstanceMetrics = TelemetryPlugin.SUBSCRIBED_METRICS.get(adminInstanceId);
final List<String> expectedInstanceMetrics = Arrays.asList("org.apache.kafka.stream.alive.stream.threads", "org.apache.kafka.stream.failed.stream.threads");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unrelated, but "alive stream thread" seems to be missing in the docs: https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#kafka_streams_client_monitoring

Would you be interested to do a follow up PR about it?

Copy link
Member

@mjsax mjsax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Only some nits. Overall LGTM. Feel free to merge.

@bbejeck bbejeck merged commit 4ed0a95 into apache:trunk Nov 5, 2024
8 checks passed
@bbejeck
Copy link
Member Author

bbejeck commented Nov 5, 2024

Merged #17021 into trunk

@bbejeck bbejeck deleted the kip_1076_implementation branch November 5, 2024 16:41
chiacyu pushed a commit to chiacyu/kafka that referenced this pull request Nov 30, 2024
Implementation of KIP-1076 to allow for adding client application metrics to the KIP-714 framework

Reviewers: Apoorv Mittal <[email protected]>, Andrew Schofield <[email protected]>, Matthias Sax <[email protected]>
tedyu pushed a commit to tedyu/kafka that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2025
Implementation of KIP-1076 to allow for adding client application metrics to the KIP-714 framework

Reviewers: Apoorv Mittal <[email protected]>, Andrew Schofield <[email protected]>, Matthias Sax <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
build Gradle build or GitHub Actions clients consumer core Kafka Broker kip Requires or implements a KIP KIP-1076 Metrics for client applications KIP-714 extension producer streams
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants