Aditya, For completeness, could you list the set of error codes in the wiki? Also, could you summarize the changes that are needed for the requests listed in KIP-4 and update the wiki accordingly?
Thanks, Jun On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:33 PM, Aditya Auradkar < aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > Thanks Andrii. I'll make the changes. > > I've also updated KIP-21 to include the new config requests. Take a look > and vote. > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-21+-+Dynamic+Configuration > > Aditya > ________________________________________ > From: Andrii Biletskyi [andrii.bilets...@stealth.ly] > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 2:26 PM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-21 Dynamic Configuration > > Hi, > > Sorry I wasn't able to participate. I don't have objections about removing > config changes from AlterTopic (as I understand both AddedConfig and > DeletedConfig) - you are welcome to update the KIP page. > > Thanks, > Andrii Biletskyi > > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Aditya Auradkar < > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > Updating the discussion with the latest comments. > > > > 1. We discussed adding 2 new API's (AlterConfig and DescribeConfig). I'll > > update KIP-21 with details on these. > > 2. Discussed during the KIP hangout. We are in agreement. > > > > (1) has a dependency on KIP-4 being completed. Rest of the work in the > KIP > > can be implemented independently. Any concerns if we tackle it as two > > separate work items implementation wise? > > > > We also discussed changing the AlterTopic command in KIP-4 to not include > > config changes. Instead, all config changes will pass through the newly > > proposed AlterConfig. If no-one objects, I can make some changes to KIP-4 > > to reflect this. > > > > Aditya > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Jay Kreps [jay.kr...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 10:51 AM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-21 Dynamic Configuration > > > > Hey Aditya, > > > > Two comments: > > > > 1. Yeah we need to reconcile this with the APIs in KIP-4. I think it does > > make sense to allow setting config during topic creation. I agree with > your > > summary that having alter topic and alter config may be confusing, but > > there are also some non-config changes such as replication factor and > > partition count that alter topic can carry out. What is the final state > you > > are proposing? > > > > 2. This is implementation related so probably can be removed from the KIP > > entirely, but you seem to be proposing a separate config manager for each > > config override type. Should we just generalize TopicConfigManager to be > > ConfigOverrideManager and have it handle all the override types we will > > have? I think I may just be unclear on what you are proposing... > > > > -Jay > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Aditya Auradkar < > > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Yeah, that was just a typo. I've fixed it. Thanks for calling it out. > > > > > > In KIP-4, I believe we have 3 types of requests: CreateTopic, > AlterTopic > > > and DeleteTopic. The topic configs are a sub-type of the Create and > Alter > > > commands. I think it would be nice to simply have a AlterConfig command > > > that can alter any type of config rather than having a specific > > > ClientConfig. > > > > > > AlterConfig => [ConfigType [AddedConfigEntry] [DeletedConfig]] > > > ConfigType => string > > > AddedConfigEntry => ConfigKey ConfigValue > > > ConfigKey => string > > > ConfigValue => string > > > DeletedConfig => string > > > > > > The downside of this approach is that we will have 2 separate ways of > > > changing topic configs (AlterTopic and AlterConfig). While a general > > > AlterConfig only makes sense if we plan to have more than two types of > > > entity configs.. it's definitely more future proof. Thoughts? > > > > > > Aditya > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: Todd Palino [tpal...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Monday, May 18, 2015 12:39 PM > > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-21 Dynamic Configuration > > > > > > Agree with Jun here on the JSON format. I think your intention was > likely > > > to have actual JSON here and it was just a typo in the wiki? > > > > > > -Todd > > > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > > > Aditya, > > > > > > > > Another thing to consider. In KIP-4, we are adding a new RPC request > to > > > > change and retrieve topic configs. Do we want to add a similar RPC > > > request > > > > to change configs per client id? If so, do we want to introduce a > > > separate > > > > new request or have a combined new request for both topic and client > id > > > > level config changes? > > > > > > > > A minor point in the wiki, for the json format in ZK, we should > change > > > > {X1=Y1, > > > > X2=Y2..} to a json map, right? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jun > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Aditya Auradkar < > > > > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-21+-+Dynamic+Configuration > > > > > > > > > > Aditya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
