Skip to content

Refactor newTopics to remove nested loops #4026

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
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 30, 2025
Merged

Refactor newTopics to remove nested loops #4026

Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c1a7ce9
Refactor newTopics to remove nested loops
cwangg897 Jul 28, 2025
e0dadd5
Refactor newTopics filtering with removeIf
cwangg897 Jul 29, 2025
69d8820
Simplify newTopics logic to use List instead of Map
cwangg897 Jul 30, 2025
bf400f5
Refactor topic filtering in KafkaAdmin.newTopics
cwangg897 Jul 30, 2025
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
60 changes: 23 additions & 37 deletions spring-kafka/src/main/java/org/springframework/kafka/core/KafkaAdmin.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -22,12 +22,11 @@
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Iterator;
import java.util.LinkedList;
import java.util.List;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.Map.Entry;
import java.util.Optional;
import java.util.Set;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;
import java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -323,41 +322,28 @@ private void updateClusterId(Admin adminClient) throws InterruptedException, Exe
*/
protected Collection<NewTopic> newTopics() {
Assert.state(this.applicationContext != null, "'applicationContext' cannot be null");
Map<String, NewTopic> newTopicsMap = new HashMap<>(
this.applicationContext.getBeansOfType(NewTopic.class, false, false));
Map<String, NewTopics> wrappers = this.applicationContext.getBeansOfType(NewTopics.class, false, false);
AtomicInteger count = new AtomicInteger();
wrappers.forEach((name, newTopics) -> {
newTopics.getNewTopics().forEach(nt -> newTopicsMap.put(name + "#" + count.getAndIncrement(), nt));
});
Map<String, NewTopic> topicsForRetry = newTopicsMap.entrySet().stream()
.filter(entry -> entry.getValue() instanceof TopicForRetryable)
.collect(Collectors.toMap(Entry::getKey, Entry::getValue));
for (Entry<String, NewTopic> entry : topicsForRetry.entrySet()) {
Iterator<Entry<String, NewTopic>> iterator = newTopicsMap.entrySet().iterator();
boolean remove = false;
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
Entry<String, NewTopic> nt = iterator.next();
// if we have a NewTopic and TopicForRetry with the same name, remove the latter
if (nt.getValue().name().equals(entry.getValue().name())
&& !(nt.getValue() instanceof TopicForRetryable)) {

remove = true;
break;
}
}
if (remove) {
newTopicsMap.remove(entry.getKey());
}
}
Iterator<Entry<String, NewTopic>> iterator = newTopicsMap.entrySet().iterator();
while (iterator.hasNext()) {
Entry<String, NewTopic> next = iterator.next();
if (!this.createOrModifyTopic.test(next.getValue())) {
iterator.remove();
}
}
return new ArrayList<>(newTopicsMap.values());

// Deal with List<NewTopic> directly instead of Map (no need for bean names)
List<NewTopic> newTopicsList = new ArrayList<>(
this.applicationContext.getBeansOfType(NewTopic.class, false, false).values());

// Add topics from NewTopics wrappers (no need for bean names either)
this.applicationContext.getBeansOfType(NewTopics.class, false, false).values()
.forEach(wrapper -> newTopicsList.addAll(wrapper.getNewTopics()));

// Collect normal topic names to check against TopicForRetryable
Set<String> normalNames = newTopicsList.stream()
Copy link
Member

@artembilan artembilan Jul 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just nit-pick: I don't think "normal" is a proper term to use.
And not only here.
It raises a question like what is the "abnormal"?
Is a TopicForRetryable abnormal?

I would suggest to go with a "regular" instead.
This way a TopicForRetryable is really "unregular" and that does not cause extra questions.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@cwangg897 cwangg897 Jul 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you very much!
I hadn't thought about it that way, but your point makes a lot of sense.
I'll update the code to reflect your feedback.

.filter(nt -> !(nt instanceof TopicForRetryable))
.map(NewTopic::name)
.collect(Collectors.toSet());

// Remove TopicForRetryable if there's a regular NewTopic with same name
newTopicsList.removeIf(nt -> nt instanceof TopicForRetryable && normalNames.contains(nt.name()));

// Apply predicate filter
newTopicsList.removeIf(nt -> !this.createOrModifyTopic.test(nt));
Copy link
Member

@artembilan artembilan Jul 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cannot we combine both conditions in the same removeIf()?
This way we would perform only one loop for removal logic.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@cwangg897 cwangg897 Jul 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

By the way, I'm curious—should these kinds of cases always be combined into one? I separated them intentionally for readability. In what situations is it better to merge them, and what are your thoughts on this?

Copy link
Member

@artembilan artembilan Jul 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Right. I wouldn't merge then if you would not raise a performance concern 😄


return newTopicsList;
}

@Override
Expand Down