Boyang, Thanks for making changes to the KIP, I'm +1 on the updated version.
-Bill On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 1:14 AM, Boyang Chen <bche...@outlook.com> wrote: > Hey friends, > > > both KIP<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > 276+Add+StreamsConfig+prefix+for+different+consumers> and pull request< > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4805> are updated. Feel free to take > another look. > > > > Thanks for your valuable feedback! > > > Best, > > Boyang > > ________________________________ > From: Boyang Chen <bche...@outlook.com> > Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 11:39 AM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-276: Add StreamsConfig prefix for different > consumers > > Thanks Matthias, Ted and Guozhang for the inputs. I shall address them in > next round. > > > ________________________________ > From: Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> > Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 4:43 AM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-276: Add StreamsConfig prefix for different > consumers > > Yes, your examples make sense to me. That was the idea behind the proposal. > > > -Matthias > > On 4/2/18 11:25 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > @Matthias > > > > That's a good question: I think adding another config for the main > consumer > > makes good tradeoffs between compatibility and new user convenience. Just > > to clarify, from user's pov on upgrade: > > > > 1) I'm already overriding some consumer configs, and now I want to > override > > these values differently for restore consumers, I'd add one new line for > > the restore consumer prefix. > > > > 2) I'm already overriding some consumer configs, and now I want to NOT > > overriding them for restore consumers, I'd change my override from > > `consumer.X` to `main.consumer.X`. > > > > 3) I'm new and have not any consumer overrides, and now if I want to > > override some, I'd use `main.consumer`, `restore.consumer` for specific > > consumer types, and ONLY consider `consumer` for the ones that I want to > > apply universally. > > > > 4) I'm already overriding some consumer configs and I'm happy with what I > > get, I do not change anything. > > > > > > Guozhang > > > > On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:10 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> bq. to introduce one more prefix `main.consumer.` > >> > >> Makes sense. > >> > >> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:06 AM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Boyang, > >>> > >>> thanks a lot for the KIP. > >>> > >>> Couple of questions: > >>> > >>>> (MODIFIED) public Map<String, Object> getRestoreConsumerConfigs(final > >>> String clientId); > >>> > >>> You mean that the implementation/semantics of this method changes, but > >>> not the API itself? Might be good to add this as "comment style" > instead > >>> of "(MODIFIED)" prefix. > >>> > >>>> By rewriting the getRestoreConsumerConfigs() function and adding the > >>> getGlobalConsumerConfigs() function, if one user uses > >>> restoreConsumerPrefix() or globalConsumerPrefix() when adding new > >>> configurations, the configs shall overwrite base consumer config. If > not > >>> specified, restore consumer and global consumer shall share the same > >> config > >>> with base consumer. > >>> > >>> While this does make sense for backward compatibility, I am wonder if > it > >>> makes the config "inheritance logic" (ie, hierarchy) too complex? We > >>> basically introduce a second level of overwrites. It might be simpler > to > >>> not introduce this hierarchy with the cost to break backward > >> compatibility. > >>> > >>> For example, config `request.timeout.ms`: > >>> > >>> User sets `request.timeout.ms=<user-value>` > >>> To change it for the main consumer, user also sets > >>> `consumer.request.timeout.ms=<consumer-value>` > >>> > >>> If user only wants to change the config for main consumer, but not for > >>> global or restore consumer, user needs to add two more configs: > >>> > >>> `restore.consumer.request.timeout.ms=<user-value>` > >>> and > >>> `global.consumer.request.timeout.ms=<user-value>` > >>> > >>> to reset both back to the default config. IMHO, this is not an optimal > >>> user experience. Thus, it might be worth to change the semantics for > >>> `consumer.` prefix to only apply those configs to the main consumer. > >>> > >>> > >>> Not sure what other think what the better solution is (I am not sure by > >>> myself to be honest---just wanted to point it out and discuss the > >>> pros/cons for both). > >>> > >>> > >>> Another though would be, to introduce one more prefix `main.consumer.` > >>> -- using this, the existing `consumer.` prefix would apply to all > >>> consumers (keeping it's current semantics) while we have overwrites for > >>> all three consumers -- this allow to directly set `main.consumer` > >>> instead of `consumer` avoiding the weird pattern from my example above > >>> and preserves backward compatibility. Ie, if we introduce an hierarchy > >>> of overwrite, a "full" hierarchy might be better than a "partial" > >>> hierarchy. > >>> > >>> > >>> Looking forward to your thoughts. > >>> > >>> > >>> -Matthias > >>> > >>> > >>> On 4/1/18 5:55 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > >>>> Thanks for the KIP Boyang, the KIP looks good to me. > >>>> > >>>> For config values, we use underscore for keeping a single word; for > >>> config > >>>> keys, though, we do not use underscores or dashes. I'd suggest using > >> dots > >>>> to be consistent with others. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Otherwise I'm +1 on the KIP. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Guozhang > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Looks good overall. > >>>>> > >>>>> public static final String RESTORE_CONSUMER_PREFIX = > >>> "restore-consumer."; > >>>>> > >>>>> For other constants in StreamsConfig, underscore is used instead of > >>> dash. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 9:38 AM, Boyang Chen <bche...@outlook.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hey friends, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would like to start a discussion thread for KIP 276: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >>>>>> 276+Add+StreamsConfig+prefix+for+different+consumers > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> And pull request is here: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4805 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [https://avatars3.githubusercontent.com/u/5845561?s=400&v=4 > >> ]<https:// > >>>>>> github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4805> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> KAFKA-6657: Add StreamsConfig prefix for different consumers by > >>> abbccdda > >>>>> · > >>>>>> Pull Request #4805 · apache/kafka<https://github. > >>>>>> com/apache/kafka/pull/4805> > >>>>>> github.com > >>>>>> This pull request is for jira 6657. The KIP proposal is here Added > >> unit > >>>>>> tests for new getGlobalConsumerConfigs API and make sure existing > >>> restore > >>>>>> consumer tests are passing. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Boyang > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > >
