Thanks for the votes y'all! I'm closing this KIP, as equivalent functionality has now been merged as part of KIP-382.
Ryanne On Sun, Oct 6, 2019, 7:55 AM Eno Thereska <eno.there...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > (Non binding) > > Thanks > Eno > > > On 4 Oct 2019, at 15:09, Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io> wrote: > > > > +1 (binding). > > > > Thanks, > > Harsha > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 6:53 AM, Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi All, > >> > >> Please vote here for the formal approval of this KIP. > >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6295#discussion_r328867657 > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 5:50 AM Ryanne Dolan <ryannedo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Hey y'all, resurrecting an old KIP for the benefit of KIP-382, which > >> depends on an additional parameter in SourceTask.commitRecord(). I've > >> updated KIP-416 according to consensus reached in PR-6295. Let's finish > the > >> vote so we can formally approve this minor KIP, please! > >> > >> Ryanne > >> > >>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 4:25 PM Ryanne Dolan <ryannedo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Andrew, I agree it's a better commitRecord, but with the slightly > >>> different semantics you mentioned. I suppose we could document that > well > >>> enough that reusing the same name would be fine. > >>> > >>> I'll resend the discussion email. Maybe it got lost somehow. > >>> > >>> Ryanne > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 4:37 AM Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofield@live. > >> com > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> I'm not quite sure about the etiquette here but I wonder whether the > KIP > >>>> could be improved. I think I missed the DISCUSS thread. > >>>> > >>>> I think that really your recordLogged(SourceRecord, RecordMetadata) > >>>> method is actually a better version of commitRecord() and perhaps it > >> ought > >>>> to be an overload. This is similar to the situation in which the > >> Serializer > >>>> interface was enhanced when record headers were added. > >>>> > >>>> public abstract class SourceTask implements Task { > >>>> public void commitRecord(SourceRecord sourceRecord, RecordMetadata > >>>> recordMetadata) { > >>>> this.commitRecord(); > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> public void commitRecord() { > >>>> } > >>>> } > >>>> > >>>> Or something like that. I do understand that the KIP mentions that > >>>> recordLogged() is only called for records that are actually ACKed, but > >> it's > >>>> very similar in intent to commitRecord() in my view. > >>>> > >>>> Just my 2 cents. > >>>> > >>>> Andrew Schofield > >>>> IBM Event Streams > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 17/01/2019, 23:54, "Ryanne Dolan" <ryannedo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hey y'all, please vote for KIP-416 by replying +1 to this thread. > >>>> > >>>> Right now, there is no way for a SourceConnector/Task to know: > >>>> > >>>> - whether a record was successfully sent to Kafka, vs filtered out > >> or > >>>> skipped. > >>>> - the downstream offsets and metadata of sent records > >>>> > >>>> KIP-416 proposes adding a recordLogged() callback for this purpose. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> https://nam05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/ > >> ?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache. > >> > org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FKAFKA%2FKIP-416%253A%2BNotify%2BSourceTask%2Bof%2BACK%2527d%2Boffsets%252C%2Bmetadata&data=02%7C01%7C%7C9fa617754cce4bab7ba508d67cd7128f%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636833660500817715&sdata=udEP27%2FrshuP5sWthvZmUIdt13whM5XqKMoia1wE93c%3D&reserved=0 > >>>> > >>>> Thanks! > >>>> Ryanne > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> >
