Hi Jason, Thanks for your quick feedback. Your suggestions seem reasonable. I'll start updating the KIP accordingly and will send out another note when it's ready.
Regards. --Vahid From: Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> To: dev@kafka.apache.org Cc: Kafka Users <us...@kafka.apache.org> Date: 07/17/2017 02:11 PM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-175: Additional '--describe' views for ConsumerGroupCommand Hey Vahid, Hmm... If possible, it would be nice to avoid cluttering the default option too much, especially if it is information which is going to be the same for all members (such as the generation). My preference would be to use the --state option that you've suggested for that info so that we can represent it more concisely. The reason I prefer the current output is that it is clear every entry corresponds to a partition for which we have committed offset. Entries like this look strange: TOPIC PARTITION CURRENT-OFFSET LOG-END-OFFSET LAG CONSUMER-ID HOST CLIENT-ID - - - - - consumer4-e173f09d-c761-4f4e-95c7-6fb73bb8fbff /127.0.0.1 consumer4 - - - - - consumer5-7b80e428-f8ff-43f3-8360-afd1c8ba43ea /127.0.0.1 consumer5 It makes me think that the consumers have committed offsets for an unknown partition. The --members option seems like a clearer way to communicate the fact that there are some members with no assigned partitions. A few additional suggestions: 1. Maybe we can rename --partitions to --offsets or --committed-offsets and the output could match the default output (in other words, --offsets is treated as the default switch). Seems no harm including the assignment information if we have it. 2. Along the lines of Onur's comment, it would be nice if the --members option included the list of assignment strategies that the consumer joined with (round-robin, range, etc). This list should always be small. 3. Thinking a little more, I'm not sure how necessary a --topics option is. The --partitions (or --offsets) option already shows the current assignment. Maybe --topics could be --subscription and just list the topics that the members subscribed to? Thanks, Jason On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Vahid S Hashemian < vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Jason, Onur, thank you for reviewing the KIP. > > Regarding the default `--describe` option, so far there have been a few > suggestions that conflict a bit. Here are the suggestions: > - Keep the current behavior exactly as is (Edo, Jeff) > - Remove members with no assignments from the current result set (Jason) > - Add additional status info to the result set (Onur) -- I assume the > additional status (which are group related info, rather than group member > related) will appear in the result separate from the member table (e.g., > before the table) > > One thing we could do to remain as close as possible to these suggestions > is trim the resulting rows as per Jason's suggestion, and add the > additional details that Onur suggested. Would this work for everyone? Edo, > Jeff, what do you think? > If so, I'll update the KIP accordingly. > > Some of the other updates based on the feedback received: > * "--describe --members" will not include a topic(partitions) column. > Instead there will be a #Partitions (number of partitions assigned to this > member) column > * "--describe --topics" will be added to list topic partitions in the > group and the relevant info > * "--describe --state" will be added to report group related info, such as > state, protocol, ... > > Thanks. > --Vahid >
