asmhatre/spring-messaging-demo
1
0
Fork 0
Code Activity

Add share-groups module: Kafka 4.3.1 share groups with Spring for Apache Kafka 4.1.1

Browse Source 
Six consumers on two partitions under a consumer group, a share group with the default
share.acquire.mode and a share group with record_limit; the three acknowledgement types and a
record that is released until Kafka stops redelivering it; a new share group starting at latest;
the ordering a share group gives up; and Spring Kafka's share containers in implicit and manual
acknowledgement modes. Tests run against a real broker (scripts/broker-up.sh) and write output/.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Lm655hdgDo5xsSLNomgdsy
This commit is contained in:
Claude
2026-10-13 02:43:36 +00:00
parent 4a5d3318bf
commit 5db56e70a0
23 changed files with 889 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
README.md
+3 -2
View File
@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
Companion code for the messaging series on [ankurm.com](https://ankurm.com). Each directory is a
self-contained Maven project for one article, with its own `pom.xml` and its own captured
output, regenerated from the test suite rather than typed by hand. Most modules keep that
output under `docs/output/` alongside numbered documentation chapters; `saga/` keeps it directly
under `output/` instead, with the equivalent depth in the article's own accordion sections.
output under `docs/output/` alongside numbered documentation chapters; `saga/` and `share-groups/` keep it
directly under `output/` instead, with the equivalent depth in the article's own accordion sections.
| Module | Article | What it demonstrates |
|---|---|---|
@@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ under `output/` instead, with the equivalent depth in the article's own accordio
| [`protocol-comparison/`](protocol-comparison/README.md) | [RSocket vs gRPC vs WebSocket on Spring Boot 4.1: When Each One Wins](https://ankurm.com/rsocket-vs-grpc-vs-websocket-spring-boot-4-1/) | One application serving the same two operations over all three, benchmarked in one JVM, ending in the only measurement that transfers off the box: what each server produces for a consumer that asked for a hundred |
| [`broker-comparison/`](broker-comparison/README.md) | [Kafka vs RabbitMQ vs Pulsar for Java Teams: A Decision Framework with Benchmarks](https://ankurm.com/kafka-vs-rabbitmq-vs-pulsar-java-decision-framework/) | The three brokers measured side by side on ordering, replay, consumer scaling and operational footprint, ending in a decision table where every row has a transcript behind it |
| [`saga/`](saga/README.md) | Saga Pattern in Spring Boot: Orchestration vs Choreography with Kafka | The same order/payment/inventory saga built twice against a real broker &mdash; choreography and orchestration &mdash; driven through the same inventory failure so the compensating transaction can be compared side by side, plus a real duplicate-delivery test for the idempotent-consumer problem |
| [`share-groups/`](share-groups/README.md) | [Queues for Kafka: Share Groups with Spring for Apache Kafka 4](https://ankurm.com/kafka-share-groups-spring-kafka-4-queues-for-kafka/) | Share groups against a real Kafka 4.3.1 broker: six consumers on two partitions, the acquire mode that decides whether they really share, the three acknowledgement types, a group that starts at the end of the topic, and the ordering you give up |
The brokers make an instructive set. Kafka's consumer holds an offset and the broker remembers
nothing about individual records; RabbitMQ's broker owns the message until it is acknowledged and