Rajini, maybe we can close the vote? Ismael
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Apurva Mehta <apu...@confluent.io> wrote: > +1 (non-binding). > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > Thanks for the KIP. +1 > > > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:26 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding). > > > > > > As I said in the discussion thread, I'm not too sure about the > hardcoded > > 30 > > > seconds timeout for the no-args `close` method. Still, it's an > > improvement > > > over what is in trunk at the moment and I don't have a good alternative > > > given that request.timeout is pretty long by default (5 minutes). > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Rajini Sivaram < > rajinisiva...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to start the voting process for *KIP-102 - Add close > with > > > > timeout for consumers*: > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > > > 102+-+Add+close+with+timeout+for+consumers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This KIP adds a new close method with a timeout for consumers similar > > to > > > > the close method in the producer. As described in the discussion > thread > > > > <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/kafka-dev/201612. > > mbox/%3cCAG_+ > > > > n9us5ohthwmyai9pz4s2j62fmils2ufj8oie9jpmyaf...@mail.gmail.com%3e>, > > > > the changes are only in the close code path and hence the impact is > not > > > too > > > > big. The existing close() method without a timeout will use a default > > > > timeout of 30 seconds. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Rajini > > > > > > > > > >
