Hi Vahid, When reading your KIP I coldn't fully understand why did you decide at failing with "offset_commit" in case #2? Can't we fail with an empty group id even in "fetch" or "fetch_offset"? What was the reason for deciding to fail at "offset_commit"? Was it because of upgrade compatibility reasons?
Thanks, Viktor On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 12:06 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > Looks good to me. > -------- Original message --------From: Vahid S Hashemian < > vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com> Date: 5/23/18 11:19 AM (GMT-08:00) To: > dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-289: Improve the default > group id behavior in KafkaConsumer > Hi Ted, > > Thanks for reviewing the KIP. I updated the KIP and introduced an error > code for the scenario described. > > --Vahid > > > > > From: Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Date: 04/27/2018 04:31 PM > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-289: Improve the default group id > behavior in KafkaConsumer > > > > bq. If they attempt an offset commit they will receive an error. > > Can you outline what specific error would be encountered ? > > Thanks > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Vahid S Hashemian < > vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I have drafted a proposal for improving the behavior of KafkaConsumer > when > > using the default group id: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > > 289%3A+Improve+the+default+group+id+behavior+in+KafkaConsumer > > The proposal based on the issue and suggestion reported in KAFKA-6774. > > > > Your feedback is welcome! > > > > Thanks. > > --Vahid > > > > > > > > >
