Thanks, Hailey. Is there a reason to restrict it to just process.roles and node.id? Someone might want to do "--required-config any.name=whatever.value", for example, and at first glance I don't see a reason why the implementation should be any different -- it seems it would probably be easier to not have to worry about restricting to specific cases, actually. WDYT?
Ron On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 5:12 PM Hailey Ni <h...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > Updated. Please let me know if you have any additional comments. Thank you! > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 3:02 PM Hailey Ni <h...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > Hi Ron. Thanks for the response. I agree with your point. I'll make the > > corresponding changes in the KIP and KAFKA-15471 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15471>. > > > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 1:40 PM Ron Dagostino <rndg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Hailey. No, I just looked, and zookeeper-server-stop does not have > >> any facility to be specific about which ZK nodes to signal. So > >> providing the ability in kafka-server-stop to be more specific than > >> just "signal all controllers" or "signal all brokers" would be a bonus > >> and therefore not necessarily required. But if it is easy to achieve > >> and doesn't add any additional cognitive load -- and at first glance > >> it does seem so -- we should probably just support it. > >> > >> Ron > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 6:15 PM Hailey Ni <h...@confluent.io.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Ron, > >> > > >> > Thank you very much for the comment. I think it makes sense to me that > >> we > >> > provide an even more specific way to kill individual > >> controllers/brokers. > >> > I have one question: does the command line for ZooKeeper cluster provide > >> > such a way to kill individual controllers/brokers? > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Hailey > >> > > >> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:01 AM Ron Dagostino <rndg...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thanks for the KIP, Hailey. It will be nice to provide some > >> > > fine-grained control for when people running the broker and controller > >> > > this way want to stop just one of them. > >> > > > >> > > One thing that occurs to me is that in a development environment > >> > > someone might want to run multiple controllers and multiple brokers > >> > > all on the same box, and in that case they might want to actually stop > >> > > just one controller or just one broker instead of all of them. So I'm > >> > > wondering if maybe instead of supporting kafka-server-stop > >> > > [--process.roles <value>] we might want to instead support > >> > > kafka-server-stop [--required-config <name=value>]. If someone wanted > >> > > to stop any/all controllers and not touch the broker(s) they could > >> > > still achieve that by invoking kafka-server-stop --required-config > >> > > process.roles=controller. But if they did want to stop a particular > >> > > controller they could then also achieve that via kafka-server-stop > >> > > --required-config node.id=1 (for example). What do you think? > >> > > > >> > > Ron > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:56 PM Hailey Ni <h...@confluent.io.invalid> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi all, > >> > > > > >> > > > I would like to start the discussion about *KIP-979: Allow > >> independently > >> > > > stop KRaft controllers or brokers* < > >> > > > > >> > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-979%3A+Allow+independently+stop+KRaft+controllers+or+brokers > >> > > > > > >> > > > It proposes adding an optional field "--process.roles <value>" in > >> the > >> > > > script to allow users to independently stop either KRaft broker > >> processes > >> > > > or controller processes. While in the past, all processes were > >> killed > >> > > using > >> > > > a single script. > >> > > > Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Much > >> > > appreciated. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks & Regards, > >> > > > Hailey > >> > > > >> > >
