Thanks, Colin. +1

Jun

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:24 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> wrote:

> Thanks for driving this KIP, Colin. The KIP is really well written. This is
> so exciting!
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Best,
> David
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:51 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 13:08, Ismael Juma wrote:
> > > Thanks for all the work on the KIP. Given the magnitude of the KIP, I
> > > expect that some tweaks will be made as the code is implemented,
> reviewed
> > > and tested. I'm overall +1 (binding).
> > >
> >
> > Thanks, Ismael.
> >
> > > A few comments below:
> > > 1. It's a bit weird for kafka-storage to output a random uuid. Would it
> > be
> > > better to have a dedicated command for that?
> >
> > I'm not sure.  The nice thing about putting it in kafka-storage.sh is
> that
> > it's there when you need it.  I also think that having subcommands, like
> we
> > do here, really reduces the "clutter" that we have in some other
> > command-line tools.  When you get help about the "info" subcommand, you
> > don't see flags for any other subcommand, for example.  I guess we can
> move
> > this later if it seems more intuitive though.
> >
> > > Also, since we use base64
> > > encoded uuids nearly everywhere (including cluster and topic ids), it
> > would
> > > be good to follow that pattern instead of the less compact
> > > "51380268-1036-410d-a8fc-fb3b55f48033".
> >
> > Good idea.  I have updated this to use base64 encoded UUIDs.
> >
> > > 2. This is a nit, but I think it would be better to talk about built-in
> > > quorum mode instead of KIP-500 mode. It's more self descriptive than a
> > KIP
> > > reference.
> >
> > I do like the sound of "quorum mode."  I guess the main question is, if
> we
> > later implement raft quorums for regular topics, would that nomenclature
> be
> > confusing?  I guess we could talk about "metadata quorum mode" to avoid
> > confusion.  Hmm.
> >
> > > 3. Did we consider using `session` (like the group coordinator) instead
> > of
> > > `regsitration` in `broker.registration.timeout.ms`?
> >
> > Hmm, broker.session.timeout.ms does sound better.  I changed it to that.
> >
> > > 4. The flat id space for the controller and broker while requiring a
> > > different id in embedded mode seems a bit unintuitive. Are there any
> > other
> > > systems that do this? I know we covered some of the reasons in the
> > "Shared
> > > IDs between Multiple Nodes" rejected alternatives section, but it
> didn't
> > > seem totally convincing to me.
> >
> > One of my concerns here is that using separate ID spaces for controllers
> > versus brokers would potentially lead to metrics or logging collisions.
> We
> > can take a look at that again once the implementation is further along, I
> > guess, to see how often that is a problem in practice.
> >
> > > 5. With regards to the controller process listening on a separate port,
> > it
> > > may be worth adding a sentence about the forwarding KIP as that is a
> main
> > > reason why the controller port doesn't need to be accessible.
> >
> > Good idea... I added a short reference to KIP-590 in the "Networking"
> > section.
> >
> > > 6. The internal topic seems to be called @metadata. I'm personally not
> > > convinced about the usage of @ in this way. I think I would go with the
> > > same convention we have used for other existing internal topics.
> >
> > I knew this one would be controversial :)
> >
> > I guess the main argument here is that using @ avoids collisions with any
> > existing topic.  Leading underscores, even double underscores, can be
> used
> > by users to create new topics, but an "at sign" cannot  It would be nice
> to
> > have a namespace for system topics that we knew nobody else could break
> > into.
> >
> > > 7. We talk about the metadata.format feature flag. Is this intended to
> > > allow for single roll upgrades?
> > > 8. Could the incarnation id be called registration id? Or is there a
> > reason
> > > why this would be a bad name?
> >
> > I liked "incarnation id" because it expresses the idea that each new
> > incarnation of the broker gets a different one.  I think "registration
> id"
> > might be confused with "the broker id is the ID we're registering."
> >
> > > 9. Could `CurMetadataOffset` be called `CurrentMetadataOffset` for
> > > `BrokerRegistrationRequest`? The abbreviation here doesn't seem to help
> > > much and makes things slightly less readable. It would also make it
> > > consistent with `BrokerHeartbeatRequest`.
> >
> > Yeah, the abbreviated name is inconsistent.  I will change it to
> > CurrentMetadataOffset.
> >
> > > 10. Should `UnregisterBrokerRecord` be `DeregisterBrokerRecord`?
> >
> > Hmm, "Register/Unregister" is more consistent with "Fence/Unfence" which
> > is why I went with Unregister.  It looks like they're both in the
> > dictionary, so I'm not sure if "deregister" has an advantage...
> >
> > > 11. Broker metrics typically have a PerSec suffix, should we stick with
> > > that for the `MetadataCommitRate`?
> >
> > Added.
> >
> > > 12. For the lag metrics, would it be clearer if we included "Offset" in
> > the
> > > name? In theory, we could have time based lag metrics too. Having said
> > > that, existing offset lag metrics do seem to just have `Lag` in their
> > name
> > > without further qualification.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, I think including Offset does make it a bit clearer.  Added.
> >
> > best,
> > Colin
> >
> >
> > > Ismael
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 1:41 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to restart the vote on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka
> > > > Controller.  The KIP is here:
> > > >
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/4RV4CQ
> > > >
> > > > The original DISCUSS thread is here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1ed098a88c489780016d963b065e8cb450a9080a4736457cd25f323c%40%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> > > >
> > > > There is also a second email DISCUSS thread, which is here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r1ed098a88c489780016d963b065e8cb450a9080a4736457cd25f323c%40%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> > > >
> > > > Please take a look and vote if you can.
> > > >
> > > > best,
> > > > Colin
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to