Hi, Kevin, Thanks for the updated KIP. A couple of more comments.
4. Should we expose the FinalizedLevel metric on the controller too? 5. Some of the metric names are camel case and some others use dash. It would be useful to be consistent. Jun On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 7:06 AM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Chia-Ping and Justine, > > Okay, that makes sense about the minimum version changing at some point. > I'll add these metrics to this KIP. Thanks for the insightful discussion. > > Best, > Kevin Wu > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 4:54 PM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey Chia-Ping and Justine, > > > > Thanks for the explanation. I see where y'all are coming from, but I want > > to make sure I understand how the value of this metric would change. > > > > It seems to me that the supported feature range is determined by the > > software version, so this metric's value should only change when a > software > > upgrade/downgrade occurs. Otherwise, the range should not change. Is that > > correct? > > > > Also, if we want to add this metric, we would just have one additional > > metric per feature right, which would be the maximum feature level > > supported, since the minimum is always 0? > > > > Thanks, > > Kevin > > > > On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 6:06 PM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hey Chia-Ping, > >> > >> I hadn't considered adding the supported versions for each feature as a > >> metric, but I'm not sure if it's helpful for monitoring the progress of > an > >> upgrade/downgrade of a feature. For example, if a node doesn't support a > >> particular feature level we're upgrading to, we shouldn't even be > allowed > >> to run the upgrade right? I think that's the case for kraft.version > (which > >> might be a special case), but I'm not sure about the other features. The > >> use case for exposing the finalized feature level is that monitoring it > >> across all nodes tells the operator that an upgrade/downgrade of the > >> feature was completed on every node. > >> > >> Best, > >> Kevin Wu > >> > >> On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 9:04 AM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey Jun, > >>> > >>> Thanks for the comments. > >>> 1. I'll update the KIP. My trunk is a bit stale. > >>> 2. Yeah, the metric should report the finalized feature level for the > >>> feature. And if it is not set, the metric will report 0. > >>> 3. I'll update the KIP with a timeline. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Kevin > >>> > >>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 3:10 PM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey Jose, > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for the response. Yeah, the new metric should expose > >>>> metadata.version as well. Let me update the KIP to reflect that. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Kevin Wu > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 2:54 PM Kevin Wu <kevin.wu2...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I wrote a KIP to add a generic feature level metric. > >>>>> Here's the link: > >>>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1180%3A+Add+a+generic+feature+level+metric > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Kevin Wu > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >
