Hi, Michael, We do have online KIP discussion meetings from time to time. How about we discuss this KIP Wed (Oct 19) at 11:00am PST? I will send out an invite (we typically do the meeting through Zoom and will post the video recording to Kafka wiki).
Thanks, Jun On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:22 AM, Michael Pearce <michael.pea...@ig.com> wrote: > @Jay and Dana > > We have internally had a few discussions of how we may address this if we > had a common apache kafka message wrapper for headers that can be used > client side only to, and address the compaction issue. > I have detailed this solution separately and linked from the main KIP-82 > wiki. > > Here’s a direct link – > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/ > Headers+Value+Message+Wrapper > > We feel this solution though doesn’t manage to address all the use cases > being mentioned still and also has some compatibility drawbacks e.g. > backwards forwards compatibility especially on different language clients > Also we still require with this solution, as still need to address > compaction issue / tombstones, we need to make server side changes and as > many message/record version changes. > > We believe the proposed solution in KIP-82 does address all these needs > and is cleaner still, and more benefits. > Please have a read, and comment. Also if you have any improvements on the > proposed KIP-82 or an alternative solution/option your input is appreciated. > > @All > As Joel has mentioned to get this moving along, and able to discuss more > fluidly, it would be great if we can organize to meet up virtually online > e.g. webex or something. > I am aware, that the majority are based in America, myself is in the UK. > @Kostya I assume you’re in Eastern Europe or Russia based on your email > address (please correct this assumption), I hope the time difference isn’t > too much that the below would suit you if you wish to join > > Can I propose next Wednesday 19th October at 18:30 BST , 10:30 PST, 20:30 > MSK we try meetup online? > > Would this date/time suit the majority? > Also what is the preferred method? I can host via Adobe Connect style > webex (which my company uses) but it isn’t the best IMHO, so more than > happy to have someone suggest a better alternative. > > Best, > Mike > > > > > On 10/8/16, 7:26 AM, "Michael Pearce" <michael.pea...@ig.com> wrote: > > >> I agree with the critique of compaction not having a value. I think > we should consider fixing that directly. > > > Agree that the compaction issue is troubling: compacted "null" > deletes > are incompatible w/ headers that must be packed into the message > value. Are there any alternatives on compaction delete semantics that > could address this? The KIP wiki discussion I think mostly assumes > that compaction-delete is what it is and can't be changed/fixed. > > This KIP is about dealing with quite a few use cases and issues, > please see both the KIP use cases detailed by myself and also the > additional use cases wiki added by LinkedIn linked from the main KIP. > > The compaction is something that happily is addressed with headers, > but most defiantly isn't the sole reason or use case for them, headers > solves many issues and use cases. Thus their elegance and simplicity, and > why they're so common in transport mechanisms and so succesfull, as stated > like http, tcp, jms. > > ________________________________________ > From: Dana Powers <dana.pow...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 11:09 PM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-82 - Add Record Headers > > > I agree with the critique of compaction not having a value. I think > we should consider fixing that directly. > > Agree that the compaction issue is troubling: compacted "null" deletes > are incompatible w/ headers that must be packed into the message > value. Are there any alternatives on compaction delete semantics that > could address this? The KIP wiki discussion I think mostly assumes > that compaction-delete is what it is and can't be changed/fixed. > > -Dana > > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Michael Pearce <michael.pea...@ig.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Jay, > > > > Thanks for the comments and feedback. > > > > I think its quite clear that if a problem keeps arising then it is > clear that it needs resolving, and addressing properly. > > > > Fair enough at linkedIn, and historically for the very first use > cases addressing this maybe not have been a big priority. But as Kafka is > now Apache open source and being picked up by many including my company, it > is clear and evident that this is a requirement and issue that needs to be > now addressed to address these needs. > > > > The fact in almost every transport mechanism including networking > layers in the enterprise ive worked in, there has always been headers i > think clearly shows their need and success for a transport mechanism. > > > > I understand some concerns with regards to impact for others not > needing it. > > > > What we are proposing is flexible solution that provides no overhead > on storage or network traffic layers if you chose not to use headers, but > does enable those who need or want it to use it. > > > > > > On your response to 1), there is nothing saying that it should be > put in any faster or without diligence and the same KIP process can still > apply for adding kafka-scope headers, having headers, just makes it easier > to add, without constant message and record changes. Timestamp is a clear > real example of actually what should be in a header (along with other > fields) but as such the whole message/record object needed to be changed to > add this, as will any further headers deemed needed by kafka. > > > > On response to 2) why within my company as a platforms designer > should i enforce that all teams use the same serialization for their > payloads? But what i do need is some core cross cutting concerns and > information addressed at my platform level and i don't want to impose onto > my development teams. This is the same argument why byte[] is the exposed > value and key because as a messaging platform you dont want to impose that > on my company. > > > > On response to 3) Actually this isnt true, there are many 3rd party > tools, we need to hook into our messaging flows that they only build onto > standardised interfaces as obviously the cost to have a custom > implementation for every company would be very high. > > APM tooling is a clear case in point, every enterprise level APM > tool on the market is able to stitch in transaction flow end 2 end over a > platform over http, jms because they can stitch in some "magic" data in a > uniform/standardised for the two mentioned they stitch this into the > headers. It is current form they cannot do this with Kafka. Providing a > standardised interface will i believe actually benefit the project as > commercial companies like these will now be able to plugin their tooling > uniformly, making it attractive and possible. > > > > Some of you other concerns as Joel mentions these are more > implementation details, that i think should be agreed upon, but i think can > be addressed. > > > > e.g. re your concern on the hashmap. > > it is more than possible not to have every record have to have a > hashmap unless it actually has a header (just like we have managed to do on > the serialized meesage) so if theres a concern on the in memory record size > for those using kafka without headers. > > > > On your second to last comment about every team choosing their own > format, actually we do want this a little, as very first mentioned, no we > don't want a free for all, but some freedom to have different serialization > has different benefits and draw backs across our business. I can iterate > these if needed. One of the use case for headers provided by linkedIn on > top of my KIP even shows where headers could be beneficial here as a header > could be used to detail which data format the message is serialized to > allowing me to consume different formats. > > > > Also we have some systems that we need to integrate that pretty near > impossible to wrap or touch their binary payloads, or we’re not allowed to > touch them (historic system, or inter/intra corporate) > > > > Headers really gives as a solution to provide a pluggable platform, > and standardisation that allows users to build platforms that adapt to > their needs. > > > > > > Cheers > > Mike > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io> > > Sent: Friday, October 7, 2016 4:45 PM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-82 - Add Record Headers > > > > Hey guys, > > > > This discussion has come up a number of times and we've always > passed. > > > > One of things that has helped keep Kafka simple is not adding in new > > abstractions and concepts except when the proposal is really elegant > and > > makes things simpler. > > > > Consider three use cases for headers: > > > > 1. Kafka-scope: We want to add a feature to Kafka that needs a > > particular field. > > 2. Company-scope: You want to add a header to be shared by > everyone in > > your company. > > 3. World-wide scope: You are building a third party tool and want > to add > > some kind of header. > > > > For the case of (1) you should not use headers, you should just add > a field > > to the record format. Having a second way of encoding things doesn't > make > > sense. Occasionally people have complained that adding to the record > format > > is hard and it would be nice to just shove lots of things in > quickly. I > > think a better solution would be to make it easy to add to the record > > format, and I think we've made progress on that. I also think we > should be > > insanely focused on the simplicity of the abstraction and not adding > in new > > thingies often---we thought about time for years before adding a > timestamp > > and I guarantee you we would have goofed it up if we'd gone with the > > earlier proposals. These things end up being long term commitments > so it's > > really worth being thoughtful. > > > > For case (2) just use the body of the message. You don't need a > globally > > agreed on definition of headers, just standardize on a header you > want to > > include in the value in your company. Since this is just used by > code in > > your company having a more standard header format doesn't really > help you. > > In fact by using something like Avro you can define exactly the > types you > > want, the required header fields, etc. > > > > The only case that headers help is (3). This is a bit of a niche > case and i > > think is easily solved just making the reading and writing of given > > required fields pluggable to work with the header you have. > > > > A couple of specific problems with this proposal: > > > > 1. A global registry of numeric keys is super super ugly. This > seems > > silly compared to the Avro (or whatever) header solution which > gives more > > compact encoding, rich types, etc. > > 2. Using byte arrays for header values means they aren't really > > interoperable for case (3). E.g. I can't make a UI that displays > headers, > > or allow you to set them in config. To work with third party > headers, the > > only case I think this really helps, you need the union of all > > serialization schemes people have used for any tool. > > 3. For case (2) and (3) your key numbers are going to collide like > > crazy. I don't think a global registry of magic numbers > maintained either > > by word of mouth or checking in changes to kafka source is the > right thing > > to do. > > 4. We are introducing a new serialization primitive which makes > fields > > disappear conditional on the contents of other fields. This > breaks the > > whole serialization/schema system we have today. > > 5. We're adding a hashmap to each record > > 6. This proposes making the ProducerRecord and ConsumerRecord > mutable > > and adding setters and getters (which we try to avoid). > > > > For context on LinkedIn: I set up the system there, but it may have > changed > > since i left. The header is maintained with the record schemas in > the avro > > schema registry and is required for all records. Essentially all > messages > > must have a field named "header" of type EventHeader which is itself > a > > record schema with a handful of fields (time, host, etc). The header > > follows the same compatibility rules as other avro fields, so it can > be > > evolved in a compatible way gradually across apps. Avro is typed and > > doesn't require deserializing the full record to read the header. The > > header information is (timestamp, host, etc) is important and needs > to > > propagate into other systems like Hadoop which don't have a concept > of > > headers for records, so I doubt it could move out of the value in > any case. > > Not allowing teams to chose a data format other than avro was > considered a > > feature, not a bug, since the whole point was to be able to share > data, > > which doesn't work if every team chooses their own format. > > > > I agree with the critique of compaction not having a value. I think > we > > should consider fixing that directly. > > > > -Jay > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Michael Pearce < > michael.pea...@ig.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi All, > >> > >> > >> I would like to discuss the following KIP proposal: > >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >> 82+-+Add+Record+Headers > >> > >> > >> > >> I have some initial ?drafts of roughly the changes that would be > needed. > >> This is no where finalized and look forward to the discussion > especially as > >> some bits I'm personally in two minds about. > >> > >> https://github.com/michaelandrepearce/kafka/tree/ > kafka-headers-properties > >> > >> > >> > >> Here is a link to a alternative option mentioned in the kip but one > i > >> would personally would discard (disadvantages mentioned in kip) > >> > >> https://github.com/michaelandrepearce/kafka/tree/kafka-headers-full > ? > >> > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Mike > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential > and for > >> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you > are not > >> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose > to others > >> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by > replying > >> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete > the email > >> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate > to the > >> official business of this company shall be understood as neither > given nor > >> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a > company > >> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG > Index > >> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number > >> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate > Hill, > >> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) > and IG > >> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated > by the > >> Financial Conduct Authority. > >> > > The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and > for the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are > not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to > others this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by > replying to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete > the email and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not > relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as > neither given nor endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets > Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number > 04008957) and IG Index Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, > company number 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 > Dowgate Hill, London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number > 195355) and IG Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and > regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. > >
