Hi Matthias, (1) Regarding KIP-770, KAFKA-13152 was also suggested by Chia. I will pick it up. I shall also update KIP-1325 to be byte-based instead of count-based. As the vote has already passed, happy to re-vote if you think it's needed.
(2) Regarding lower bound, I had filed a task to benchmark pause/resume to decide on a lower bound; I can cancel it. cc Chia — pls let me know if this is fine. Thanks, Murali On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 11:54 PM Matthias J. Sax <[email protected]> wrote: > Seems I am late to the party, and the vote already passed. > > Two comments from my side: > > > (1) KAFKA-13152 is backed by KIP-770 which was accepted. We just did not > complete the implementation yet. Thus, I would personally prefer to > follow KIP-770 approach for this KIP, too, and make the config byte > based to begin with. This would avoid to add new config we would > deprecate again anyway... > > Also, nobody is working to complete KIP-770 atm, and I would really like > to complete it. Maybe Muralidhar would be interested to pick it up? This > way, we might be able to move both config to be byte based at the same > time. > > > (2) About the pause/resume quest: for the existing config (count base, > and also future byte based config via KIP-770), we don't have a lower > bound when to resume, and I don't think we need one. In the end, we want > to bound the buffer what we achieve. I would only make it more complex > is there is indeed a issue we need to solve, but no user ever reported a > problem, so I would keep it simple. > > > -Matthias > > > On 5/25/26 4:43 AM, Muralidhar Basani via dev wrote: > > Hi Chia, that’s a valid point. > > > > I shall add to kip that based on the benchmarks, we decide to add another > > lower bound or not. > > It could be a follow-up. > > > > Thanks, > > Murali > > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2026 at 08:22, Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Should we introduce a lower bound to avoid bouncing between pause and > >> resume? For example, a paused partition should only be resumed once the > >> buffered records drop below 50% of the max capacity > >> > >> On 2026/04/24 17:11:08 Muralidhar Basani via dev wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I would like to start a discussion on KIP-1325, which introduces a new > >>> streams config to handle message fetching in the restore path. > >>> > >>> KIP : > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1325%3A+Add+restore.buffered.records.per.partition+to+cap+Kafka+Streams+state-restore+memory > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Murali > >>> > >> > > > >
