Hi, Rajini, For the following statements, would it be better to allocate the quota to all connections whose client-id is clientX? This way, existing client-id quotas are fully compatible in the new release whether the cluster is in a single user or multi-user environment.
4. If client-id quota override is defined for clientX in /config/clients/clientX, this quota is allocated for the sole use of <userN, clientX> 5. If dynamic client-id default is configured in /config/clients, this default quota is allocated for the sole use of <userN, clientX> 6. If quota.producer.default is configured for the broker in server.properties, this default quota is allocated for the sole use of <userN, clientX> We can potentially add a default quota for both user and client at path /config/users/clients? Thanks, Jun On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 3:01 AM, Rajini Sivaram < rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Ismael, Jun, > > Thank you both for the feedback. Have updated the KIP to add dynamic > default quotas for client-id with deprecation of existing static default > properties. > > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > Yes, for consistency, perhaps we can allow client-id quota to be > configured > > dynamically too and mark the static config in the broker as deprecated. > If > > both are set, the dynamic one wins. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Rajini Sivaram < > > > rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > It is actually quite tempting to do the same for client-id quotas as > > > well, > > > > but I suppose we can't break existing users who have configured > > defaults > > > in > > > > server.properties and providing two ways of setting client-id > defaults > > > > would be just too confusing. > > > > > > > > > > Using two different approaches for client-id versus user quota defaults > > is > > > also not great. We could deprecate the server.properties default > configs > > > for client-id quotas and remove them in the future. In the meantime, we > > > would have to live with 2 level defaults. > > > > > > Jun, what are your thoughts on this? > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Rajini >
