Hi Omnia, Thanks for the updates. Sorry for the delay but I have a few more small questions about the API: - Do we really need "isMM2InternalTopic()"? There's already "ReplicationPolicy.isInternalTopic()". If so, we need to explain the difference between these 2 methods.
- Is "isCheckpointTopic()" expected to detect all checkpoint topics (for all MM2 instances) or only the ones for this connector instance. If it's the later, I wonder if we could do without the method. As this interface is only called by MM2, we could first call "checkpointTopic()" and check if that's equal to the topic we're checking. If it's the former, we don't really know topic names other MM2 instances may be using! - The 3 methods returning topic names have different APIs: "heartbeatsTopic()" takes no arguments, "offsetSyncTopic()" takes the target cluster alias and "checkpointTopic()" takes "clusterAlias" (which one is it? source or target?). As the interface extends Configurable, maybe we could get rid of all the arguments and use the config to find the cluster aliases. WDYT? These are minor concerns, just making sure I fully understand how the API is expected to be used. Once these are cleared, I'll be happy to vote for this KIP. Thanks On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 12:06 PM Omnia Ibrahim <o.g.h.ibra...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Mickael, > Did you get time to review the changes to the KIP? If you okay with it could > you vote for the KIP here > ttps://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg113575.html? > Thanks > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 2:19 PM Omnia Ibrahim <o.g.h.ibra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Mickael, >> 1) That's right the interface and default implementation will in >> mirror-connect >> 2) Renaming the interface should be fine too especially if you planning to >> move other functionality related to the creation there, I can edit this >> >> if you are okay with that please vote for the KIP here >> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg113575.html >> >> >> Thanks >> Omnia >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:58 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Omnia, >>> >>> Thank you for the reply, it makes sense. >>> >>> A couple more comments: >>> >>> 1) I'm assuming the new interface and default implementation will be >>> in the mirror-client project? as the names of some of these topics are >>> needed by RemoteClusterUtils on the client-side. >>> >>> 2) I'm about to open a KIP to specify where the offset-syncs topic is >>> created by MM2. In restricted environments, we'd prefer MM2 to only >>> have read access to the source cluster and have the offset-syncs on >>> the target cluster. I think allowing to specify the cluster where to >>> create that topic would be a natural extension of the interface you >>> propose here. >>> >>> So I wonder if your interface could be named InternalTopicsPolicy? >>> That's a bit more generic than InternalTopicNamingPolicy. That would >>> also match the configuration setting, internal.topics.policy.class, >>> you're proposing. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 10:15 PM Omnia Ibrahim <o.g.h.ibra...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Mickael, >>> > Thanks for your feedback! >>> > Regards your question about having more configurations, I considered >>> > adding >>> > configuration per each topic however this meant adding more configurations >>> > for MM2 which already have so many, also the more complicated and advanced >>> > replication pattern you have between clusters the more configuration lines >>> > will be added to your MM2 config which isn't going to be pretty if you >>> > don't have the same topics names across your clusters. >>> > >>> > Also, it added more complexity to the implementation as MM2 need to >>> > 1- identify if a topic is checkpoints so we could list the checkpoints >>> > topics in MirrorMaker 2 utils as one cluster could have X numbers >>> > checkpoints topics if it's connected to X clusters, this is done right now >>> > by listing any topic with suffix `.checkpoints.internal`. This could be >>> > done by add `checkpoints.topic.suffix` config but this would make an >>> > assumption that checkpoints will always have a suffix also having a suffix >>> > means that we may need a separator as well to concatenate this suffix with >>> > a prefix to identify source cluster name. >>> > 2- identify if a topic is internal, so it shouldn't be replicated or track >>> > checkpoints for it, right now this is relaying on disallow topics with >>> > `.internal` suffix to be not replicated and not tracked in checkpoints but >>> > with making topics configurable we need a way to define what is an >>> > internal >>> > topic. This could be done by making using a list of all internal topics >>> > have been entered to the configuration. >>> > >>> > So having an interface seemed easier and also give more flexibility for >>> > users to define their own topics name, define what is internal topic >>> > means, >>> > how to find checkpoints topics and it will be one line config for each >>> > herder, also it more consistence with MM2 code as MM2 config have >>> > TopicFilter, ReplicationPolicy, GroupFilter, etc as interface and they can >>> > be overridden by providing a custom implementation for them or have some >>> > config that change their default implementations. >>> > >>> > Hope this answer your question. I also updated the KIP to add this to the >>> > rejected solutions. >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:19 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Hi Omnia, >>> > > >>> > > Thanks for the KIP. Indeed being able to configure MM2's internal >>> > > topic names would be a nice improvement. >>> > > >>> > > Looking at the KIP, I was surprised you propose an interface to allow >>> > > users to specify names. Have you considered making names changeable >>> > > via configurations? If so, we should definitely mention it in the >>> > > rejected alternatives as it's the first method that comes to mind. >>> > > >>> > > I understand an interface gives a lot of flexibility but I'd expect >>> > > topic names to be relatively simple and known in advance in most >>> > > cases. >>> > > >>> > > I've not checked all use cases but something like below felt >>> > > appropriate: >>> > > clusters = primary,backup >>> > > primary->backup.offsets-sync.topic=backup.mytopic-offsets-sync >>> > > >>> > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 3:36 PM Omnia Ibrahim <o.g.h.ibra...@gmail.com> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > Hey everyone, >>> > > > Please take a look at KIP-690: >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-690%3A+Add+additional+configuration+to+control+MirrorMaker+2+internal+topics+naming+convention >>> > > > >>> > > > Thanks for your feedback and support. >>> > > > >>> > > > Omnia >>> > > > >>> > >
