Error if connections_max_idle_ms not larger than request_timeout_ms #1688
Conversation
jeffwidman
force-pushed
the
verify-timeouts-set-correctly
branch
2 times, most recently
from
94595b8 to
51c0dd4
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed 2 of 2 files at r1.
Reviewable status:complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved
|
Would a warning be more appropriate here? Is this configuration always doomed, or is it possible some power user would want do go against the grain in some circumstance? |
jeffwidman
force-pushed
the
verify-timeouts-set-correctly
branch
from
51c0dd4 to
fe8f61f
Compare
jeffwidman
force-pushed
the
verify-timeouts-set-correctly
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b13bcf5 to
9433abf
Compare
It's a great question, which I hadn't even considered when I first put this up. That said, I've thought about it several times and I cannot come up with a valid scenario... unlike Zookeeper, clients don't keep any session/request state that spans multiple connections. |
`connections_max_idle_ms` must always be larger than `request_timeout_ms` to avoid potentially unexpected behavior. Fix #1680.
jeffwidman
force-pushed
the
verify-timeouts-set-correctly
branch
from
9433abf to
5954189
Compare
|
|
||
| def test_fetch_max_wait_larger_than_request_timeout_raises(self): | ||
| with pytest.raises(KafkaConfigurationError): | ||
| KafkaConsumer(bootstrap_servers='localhost:9092', fetch_max_wait_ms=41000, request_timeout_ms=40000) | ||
| KafkaConsumer(bootstrap_servers='localhost:9092', fetch_max_wait_ms=50000, request_timeout_ms=40000) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this was a simple change from 41000 to 50000 purely for improved readability/consistency with the other tests here, the test passes either way.
|
|
||
| def test_request_timeout_larger_than_connections_max_idle_ms_raises(self): | ||
| with pytest.raises(KafkaConfigurationError): | ||
| KafkaConsumer(bootstrap_servers='localhost:9092', api_version=(0, 9), request_timeout_ms=50000, connections_max_idle_ms=40000) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not understand why this test fails with NoBrokerFound if api_version=(0, 9) is omitted... or rather, I realize it's a problem with the version probing timing out, but why does test_fetch_max_wait_larger_than_request_timeout_raises() right above succeed without needing to specify the version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that may have been a side effect of the old AND check. If you drop the api_version here I would expect the test to still pass
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IIRC, I actually did try that exact thing this morning, and it still failed with the NoBrokerFound error. That's what confuses me.
connections_max_idle_msmust always be larger thanrequest_timeout_msto avoid potentially unexpected behavior.
Fix #1680.
This change is