Is it really true that the controller always sends two requests? Aren't the operations different (stop replica with delete versus stop replica without)?
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 9:59 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to inform you that I have slightly changed the schema which was > proposed > in the KIP. During the implementation, I have realized that the proposed > schema > did not work. The new one reorganises how topics/partitions are stored. > > I'd like to amend the current KIP with the following: > > At the moment, the StopReplicaRequest has a top level field named > `DeletePartitions` > which indicates whether the partitions present in the request must be > deleted or not. > The downside of this is that the controller always ends up sending two > StopReplica > requests, one with DeletePartitions=true and one with > DeletePartitions=false. > > Instead, I'd like to add a per-partition DeletePartition field to combine > everything in > one request. This will reduce the number of requests sent to each broker > and also > increase the batching. I've already implemented it. > > I've already updated the schema in the KIP if you want to see it. I will > update the > KIP itself if you agree with the amendment. > > What do you think? Does it sound reasonable? > > Best, > David > > On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 3:37 PM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > The vote has passed with +3 binding votes (Jason Gustafson, Gwen Shapira, > > Jun Rao). > > > > Thanks to everyone! > > > > Best, > > David > > > > On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 9:02 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > >> Hi Jun, > >> > >> You're right. I have noticed it while implementing it. I plan to use a > >> default > >> value as a sentinel in the protocol (e.g. -2) to cover this case. > >> > >> David > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 3:18 AM Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, David, > >>> > >>> Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me too. Just one comment below. > >>> > >>> 1. Regarding the sentinel leader epoch to indicate topic deletion, it > >>> seems > >>> that we need to use a different sentinel value to indicate that the > >>> leader > >>> epoch is not present when the controller is still on the old version > >>> during > >>> upgrade. > >>> > >>> Jun > >>> > >>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 11:20 AM Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > +1 > >>> > > >>> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2020, 2:16 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > Hi all, > >>> > > > >>> > > I would like to start a vote on KIP-570: Add leader epoch in > >>> > > StopReplicaRequest > >>> > > > >>> > > The KIP is here: > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-570%3A+Add+leader+epoch+in+StopReplicaRequest > >>> > > > >>> > > Thanks, > >>> > > David > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >> >
