Hi Bruno, Thanks for the feedback, that makes sense. I’ve updated the KIP based on suggestions [1]
Best, Levani [1] - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-708%3A+Rack+awarness+for+Kafka+Streams > On 9. Mar 2021, at 11:48, Bruno Cadonna <br...@confluent.io.INVALID> wrote: > > Hi Levani, > > The KIP looks good! > > I have two comments: > > 1. In the example of the ideal standby task distribution, you should make > clear that the algorithm will either choose distributions Node-1, Node-5, > Node-9 or Node-1, Node-6, Node-8, but not both. > > 2. Could you formulate a bit more generic section "Changes in > HighAvailabilityTaskAssignor"? I think it is enough to state that this KIP > will NOT affect the task assignor behavior specified in KIP-441, but it will > rather extend the behavior of the distribution of standby replicas. I think > there is no need to refer to actual code. > > After this changes, I am +1 on starting the vote thread. > > Best, > Bruno > > On 08.03.21 17:32, Levani Kokhreidze wrote: >> Hello all, >> Bumping this thread in case there’s any other feedback around KIP-708 [1]. >> If not, I will start voting thread sometime this week. >> Best, >> Levani >> [1] - >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-708%3A+Rack+awarness+for+Kafka+Streams >> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-708:+Rack+awarness+for+Kafka+Streams> >>> On 4. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Levani Kokhreidze <levani.co...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Bruno, >>> >>> Thanks a lot for the feedback. >>> I’ve updated KIP [1] based on suggestions. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Levani >>> >>> [1] - >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-708%3A+Rack+awarness+for+Kafka+Streams >>> >>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-708:+Rack+awarness+for+Kafka+Streams> >>> >>>> On 1. Mar 2021, at 22:55, Bruno Cadonna <br...@confluent.io >>>> <mailto:br...@confluent.io>> wrote: >>>> >>>> clientTagPrefix >>>
