Hi David, Thanks for sharing this KIP! Really exciting to hear how we are changing the protocol! The motivation section really made me realize how useful this change will be.
I've done a first pass of the KIP, and may have more questions, but thought I'd start with a few I thought of already. - I saw some usages of topic IDs in the new protocols/records/interfaces, but wasn't sure if they were used everywhere. Are you planning on relying on topic IDs for the new protocol? - I saw the section about using a feature flag first before integrating the feature with ibp/metadata version. I understand the logic for testing with the flag, but it also seems like a bit of work to deprecate and switch to the ibp/metadata version approach. What was the reasoning behind switching the enablement mechanism? - Generally, are there implications for KRaft here? (IBP/metadata version is something that I think of) And if so, will both cluster types be supported? Thanks again to everyone who worked on this KIP! Justine On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 1:45 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to start a discussion thread on KIP-848: The Next > Generation of the Consumer Rebalance Protocol. With this KIP, we aim > to make the rebalance protocol (for consumers) more reliable, more > scalable, easier to implement for clients, and easier to debug for > operators. > > The KIP is here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/HhD1D. > > Please take a look and let me know what you think. > > Best, > David > > PS: I will be away from July 18th to August 8th. That gives you a bit > of time to read and digest this long KIP. >
