The latest HEAD does seem to solve one issue, where a new topic being created after the consumer is started, would not be consumed.
But the bigger issue is that we have a couple different consumers both consuming the same set of topics (under different groupids), and hanging after a while (both hanging at about the same point). The topics in each case are selected with a filter (actually a relatively large number of topics, some of which are newly created over time). I'm still not sure whether the new version is solving this issue (since it was a rare transient thing anyway). Thanks, Jason On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, 0.8 will be released from the HEAD of the 0.8 branch. Is the problem > with consuming new topics or topics whose partitions are increased? If so, > see KAFKA-1030 and KAFKA-1075. > > Thanks, > > Jun > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Jason Rosenberg <j...@squareup.com> wrote: > > > Will the 0.8 release come from the HEAD of the 0.8 branch? I'd like to > > experiment with it, to see if it solves some of the issues I'm seeing, > with > > consumers refusing to consume new messages. We've been using the beta1 > > version. > > > > I remember mention there was a Jira issues along these lines, which was > > fixed post 0.8-beta1. Which issue was that (I'd like to see if it > matches > > what I'm seeing). > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jason > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Jay Kreps <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I uploaded a patch against trunk which also fixes KAFKA-1036, the other > > > knows windows issue. Review appreciated. Should be an easy one. > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1008 > > > > > > -Jay > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > KAFKA-1008 has been checked into the 0.8 branch and needs to be > > manually > > > > double-committed to trunk. To avoid merging problems, I suggest that > > for > > > > all future changes in the 0.8 branch, we double commit them to trunk. > > Any > > > > objections? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jun > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Everyone, > > > > > > > > > > I made another pass of the remaining jiras that we plan to fix in > the > > > 0.8 > > > > > final release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-954?jql=project%20%3D%20KAFKA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%220.8%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22) > > > > > > > > > > Do people agree with this list? > > > > > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > > > > > I don't have good understanding of KAFKA-1018. Do you think this > > needs > > > to > > > > > be fixed in 0.8 final? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Jun > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Jun Rao <jun...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi, Everyone, > > > > >> > > > > >> We have been stabilizing the 0.8 branch since the beta1 release. I > > > think > > > > >> we are getting close to an 0.8 final release. I made an initial > list > > > of > > > > the > > > > >> remaining jiras that should be fixed in 0.8. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20KAFKA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%220.8%22%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened%2C%20%22Patch%20Available%22) > > > > >> > > > > >> 1. Do people agree with the list? > > > > >> > > > > >> 2. If the list is good, could people help contributing/reviewing > the > > > > >> remaining jiras? > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> > > > > >> Jun > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
