Thanks for the KIP, Dong. I agree that that the metrics are useful. Like Edoardo and Mickael said, it seems like it may be better to choose a different name. A couple of additional suggestions: `UnderMinIsrPartitionCount` and `UnderMinIsr`.
Ismael On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> wrote: > What about simply calling them 'BelowIsrPartitionCount' and 'BelowIsr' ? > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Edoardo Comar <eco...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > Hi Dong, > > > > many thanks for the KIP. It's a very useful metric. > > > > by saying > >> Unavailable partitions could be most easily defined as “The number of > > partitions that this broker leads for which the ISR is insufficient to > > meet the minimum ISR required.” > > > > I presume you meant to call 'Unavailable' the partitions whose ISR.size < > > min.insync ? > > > > Now, a partition whose ISR is < min.insync can be still used to consume > > messages from. It also can be used to produce messages to, as long as the > > producer does not request acks=-1 (i.e. acks=all). > > > > So it is not exactly 'Unavailable' ... perhaps we could call it 'Unsafe' > ? > > Or the community can come up with a better name. > > > > I recently had a few discussions about the issue, and I opened a PR to > > update the docs (that's still hoping to be reviewed and merged ... hint > > hint :-) > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/3035 > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5290 > > > > Thanks! > > Edo > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Edoardo Comar > > IBM Message Hub > > eco...@uk.ibm.com > > IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park, SO21 2JN > > > > > > > > > > From: Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Date: 30/05/2017 10:51 > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-164 Add unavailablePartitionCount and > > per-partition Unavailable metrics > > > > > > > > +1 > > It's a mystery how this didn't already exist as it's one of the key > > cluster's health indicator > > > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Sounds good. I was sure this existed already for some reason :) > >> > >> On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 11:06 AM Dong Lin <lindon...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> We created KIP-164 to propose adding per-partition metric *Unavailable* > > and > >>> per-broker metric *UnavailablePartitionCount* > >>> > >>> The KIP wik can be found at > >>> > >>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-164-+Add+ > unavailablePartitionCount+and+per-partition+Unavailable+metrics > > > >>> . > >>> > >>> Comments are welcome. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Dong > >>> > > > > > > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > > 741598. > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 > 3AU > > >
