Skip to content

Conversation

@see-quick
Copy link
Contributor

@see-quick see-quick commented Aug 13, 2025

This PR fixes a problem related to TestLinearWriteSpeed. During my
work on KIP-780, I discovered that benchmarks for TestLinearWriteSpeed
do not account for compression algorithms. It always uses
Compression.NONE when creating records. The problem was introduced in
this PR [1].

[1] - #17736

Reviewers: Ken Huang s7133700@gmail.com, Mickael Maison
mickael.maison@gmail.com, Chia-Ping Tsai chia7712@gmail.com

Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
@github-actions github-actions bot added triage PRs from the community performance small Small PRs labels Aug 13, 2025
Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
Copy link
Member

@chia7712 chia7712 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@see-quick Thanks for finding this. I also noticed another bug—could you please fix it in this PR?

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the triage PRs from the community label Aug 14, 2025
Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
private static void setupCompression(CompressionType compressionType,
Compression.Builder<? extends Compression> compressionBuilder,
int compressionLevel) {
Integer compressionLevel) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Perhaps we could call setupCompression only if compressionLevel is defined. WDYT?

if (compressionLevel != null) setupCompression(compressionType, compressionBuilder, compressionLevel);

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure, that works too — thanks 👍

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this change is no longer required, right?

Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
Copy link
Collaborator

@m1a2st m1a2st left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you also update the message-size argument description? Since it has a default value and users cannot manually set it to null, I think the REQUIRED: should be removed.

Copy link
Collaborator

@m1a2st m1a2st left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The same applies to the files argument. In this case, the user input for this argument is checked at line 129 in checkRequiredArgs. However, if the user does not provide a value and the default value is used, it will fail. I think we should update the description and remove it from the validator.

Signed-off-by: see-quick <maros.orsak159@gmail.com>
@see-quick
Copy link
Contributor Author

The same applies to the files argument. In this case, the user input for this argument is checked at line 129 in checkRequiredArgs. However, if the user does not provide a value and the default value is used, it will fail. I think we should update the description and remove it from the validator.

Thanks, updated.

@chia7712
Copy link
Member

the mode --log is broken and it is traced by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-19614

@chia7712 chia7712 merged commit 93068b4 into apache:trunk Aug 17, 2025
24 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants