Agree. All I found on this was KAFKA-1325, which is more about inconsistency than real use-case.
Anyway, I'd argue that if we added it in 0.8.2.0, we can't take it out now :) On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Aditya Auradkar <aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > Is there actually a use case where we need "log.retention.ms"? In most > cases, people would want to retain their logs for at least a few minutes > I'd think. > > Aditya > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Gwen Shapira <gshap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> Backward compatibility, I think. >> >> At least the "ms" one is fairly new, and I think we left the others to >> avoid break configuration during upgrade. >> >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Mayuresh Gharat >> <gharatmayures...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I was thinking why we have 3 different configs for the same property (log >> > retention) : >> > >> > "log.retention.ms" >> > "log.retention.minutes" >> > "log.retention.hours" >> > >> > Why don't we only use the Milliseconds? >> > There are other properties as well like log Jitter, LogRollTime which >> raise >> > the same question in my mind. >> > >> > The reason I am asking this is that a user might misconfigure them like >> > setting the log.retention.ms = 1 and log.retention.hours = 1. >> > >> > -- >> > -Regards, >> > Mayuresh R. Gharat >> > (862) 250-7125 >>
