Thanks for the feedback folks. *Jun*
10. Fixed it. It now says 2 as the new default for recovery threads. 11. I have added a sentence that we will apply the defaults for both broker level and equivalent topic level configs. I have further added both the broker level and the topic level config to the table. For example, you may notice (message.timestamp.after.max.ms / log.message.timestamp.after.max.ms). Furthermore, the constraints will apply (similar to constraints today) when validating dynamically changed configuration and also when validating static configuration (such as server.properties). Please let me know if I have missed anything. 12. In the interest of time, I have removed the constraint proposal for rf >= min.insync.replicas. We will circle back on it in a separate KIP. *Luke* 10 and 12 above should align with what you suggested. -- Divij Vaidya On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 4:00 AM Luke Chen <show...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Divij and Jun, > > Thanks for your comments. > I'm good we put the default value of num.recovery.threads.per.data.dir to 2 > since there are many factors that need to be considered. > > And James, good point of min.insync.replicas validation. If it's > complicated or will confuse users, I'd propose we leave it out of v4.0.0. > > Thanks. > Luke > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 2:31 AM Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > > Hi, Divij, > > > > Thanks for the reply. A few more comments. > > > > 10. num.recovery.threads.per.data.dir still seems to depend on the number > > of cores. > > > > 11. Some of the configs on the server side exist at different levels > > (static, broker, topic, etc) with slightly different names. It would be > > useful to be clear at what level the new default and the constraint > apply. > > > > 12. James had a good point on min.insync.replicas. It would be useful to > > define when the constraint applies (topic creation, config changes, etc). > > For example, if the broker-level min.insync.replicas value is changed to > 2, > > what happens to existing topics with replication factor 1? If a topic has > > min.insync.replicas of 2, what happens to an AlterPartitionReassignments > > request that wants to reduce the replication factor to 1? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 9:57 AM Divij Vaidya <divijvaidy...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Jun > > > > > > Thank you for the feedback. I have removed the configuration changes > > where > > > we are relying on num cores. The only change I have kept is increasing > > > recovery threads to 2 (from 1 as default). > > > > > > James > > > > > > Thank you for bringing the JIRA to my attention. I haven't looked > deeply > > > into the implementation but based on my understanding of the Kafka code > > > base, I do believe that there is a path to implement this constraint. > We > > > will cross that bridge during the implementation phase and I will > ensure > > > that I look at the historical context you provided in the JIRA. > > > > > > -- > > > Divij Vaidya > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 6:48 AM James Cheng <wushuja...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > About replication.factor >= min.insync.replicas change, you should > look > > > at > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-4680 . That JIRA talks > > about > > > > some of the complexities of detecting it. For example, what if a > topic > > > has > > > > replication factor 1, but someone changes the broker-level > > > > min.insync.replicas value to 2? How would that be detected? > > > > > > > > That JIRA has an associated PR. The PR has some comments that link to > > > > discussions on this mailing list. > > > > > > > > That PR, btw, was just closed due to being stale. > > > > > > > > -James > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2024, at 2:15 AM, Divij Vaidya <divijvaidy...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hey folks > > > > > > > > > > With 4.0, we have an opportunity to reset the default values and > add > > > > > constraints in the configurations based on our learnings since 3.0. > > > > > > > > > > Here's a KIP which modifies defaults for some properties and > modifies > > > the > > > > > constraints for a few others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1030%3A+Change+constraints+and+default+values+for+various+configurations > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking forward for your feedback. > > > > > > > > > > (Previous discussion thread on this topic - > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/3dx9mdmsqf8pko9xdmhks80k96g650zp ) > > > > > > > > > >
