Hi, Thanks for the KIP. I think this approach based on configs is a bit too open ended and not very user friendly. Why don't we simply provide flags for the things a user may care about? So far, it seems like we have two good candidates (node id and process role). Are there any others?
Ismael On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 6:19 PM Hailey Ni <h...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > Hi Ron, > > I think you made a great point, making the "name" arbitrary instead of > hard-coding it will make the functionality much more flexible. I've updated > the KIP and the code accordingly. Thanks for the great idea! > > Thanks, > Hailey > > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 2:34 PM Ron Dagostino <rndg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
