Hi, Thanks for adding the detail. It seems quite straightforward to implement in the producer code.
AS1: Personally, and of course this is a matter of taste and just one opinion, I don’t like adding Headers to RecordMetadata. It seems to me that RecordMetadata is information about the record that’s been produced whereas the Headers are really part of the record itself. So, I prefer the alternative which overloads ProducerInterceptor.onAcknowledgement. AS2: ProducerBatch and FutureRecordMetadata are both internal classes and do not need to be documented in the KIP. AS3: This KIP is adding rather than replcaing the constructor for RecordMetadata. You should define the value for the Headers if an existing constructor without headers is used. AS4: You should add a method `Headers headers()` to RecordMetadata. I wonder what other community members think about whether it’s a good idea to extend RecordMetadata with the headers. Thanks, Andrew > On 29 Jul 2024, at 05:36, Rich C. <chenjy.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Thank you for the positive feedback. I added proposal changes to KIP-512 > and included a FAQ section to address some concerns. > > Hi Andrew, yes, this KIP focuses on > `ProducerInterceptor.onAcknowledgement`. I added FAQ#3 to explain that. > > Hi Matthias, for your question about "RecordMetadata being Kafka metadata" in > this thread > <https://lists.apache.org/list?dev@kafka.apache.org:lte=1M:make%20Record%20Headers%20available%20in%20onAcknowledgement>, > I added FAQ#2 to explain that. If I have missed any documentation regarding > the design of RecordMetadata, please let me know. > > Regards, > Rich > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 4:00 PM Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofi...@live.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Rich, >> Thanks for resurrecting this KIP. It seems like a useful idea to me and >> I’d be interested in seeing the proposed public interfaces. >> >> I note that you specifically called out the >> ProducerInterceptor.onAcknowledgement >> method, as opposed to the producer Callback.onCompletion method. >> >> Thanks, >> Andrew >> >>> On 26 Jul 2024, at 04:54, Rich C. <chenjy.r...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Kevin, >>> >>> Thanks for your support. >>> >>> Hi Matthias, >>> >>> I apologize for the confusion. I've deleted the Public Interface sections >>> for now. I think we should focus on discussing its necessity with the >>> community. I'll let it sit for a few more days, and if there are no >>> objections, I will propose changes over the weekend and share them here >>> again. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Rich >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 5:51 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Rich, >>>> >>>> thanks for resurrecting this KIP. I was not part of the original >>>> discussion back in the day, but personally agree with your assessment >>>> that making headers available in the callbacks would make developer's >>>> life much simpler. >>>> >>>> For the KIP itself, starting with "Public Interface" section, everything >>>> is formatted as "strike through". Can you fix this? It's confusing as >>>> it's apparently not correctly formatted, but unclear which (if any) >>>> parts should be formatted like this. In general, wiki pages have >>>> history, so strike-through should be used rather rarely but the wiki >>>> page should just contain the latest proposal. (If one want to see the >>>> history, it's there anyway). >>>> >>>> >>>> -Matthias >>>> >>>> On 7/23/24 6:36 AM, Kevin Lam wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for starting the discussion. Latency Measurement and Tracing >>>>> Completeness are both good reasons to support this feature, and would >> be >>>>> interested to see this move forward. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 11:15 PM Rich C. <chenjy.r...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope this email finds you well. >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to start a discussion on KIP-512. The initial version of >>>>>> KIP-512 was created in 2019, and I have resurrected it in 2024 with >> more >>>>>> details about the motivation behind it. >>>>>> >>>>>> You can view the current version of the KIP here: KIP-512: Make Record >>>>>> Headers Available in onAcknowledgement. >>>>>> < >>>>>> >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-512%3A+make+Record+Headers+available+in+onAcknowledgement >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's focus on discussing the necessity of this feature first. If we >>>> agree >>>>>> on its importance, we can then move on to discussing the proposed >>>> changes. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looking forward to your feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Rich
