Thanks, Tom! Great work. best, Colin
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019, at 04:33, Tom Bentley wrote: > Hi Folks, > > It took a while, but the work for KIP-183 has now been merged. My thanks to > everyone involved. > > A few details changed between what was voted on and what ultimately got > merged. I've updated the KIP to reflect what was actually merged. If > anyone > is interested in the gory details they can look at > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=73632065&selectedPageVersions=20&selectedPageVersions=18 > and > https://github.com/apache/kafka/commit/269b65279c746bc54c611141a5a6509f9b310f11 > > Kind regards, > > Tom > > On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 at 16:30, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Since no one has objected, I conclude that this KIP is again accepted. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Tom > > > > On 7 September 2017 at 22:31, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Tom, > >> > >> The updated part in "AdminClient:electPreferredLeaders()" looks reasonable > >> to me. If there is no objections from the voted committer by end of the > >> day, I think you can mark it as accepted. > >> > >> > >> Guozhang > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Unfortunately I've had to make a small change to the > >> > ElectPreferredLeadersResult, because exposing a Map<TopicPartition, > >> > KafkaFuture<Void>> was incompatible with the case where > >> > electPreferredLeaders() was called with a null partitions argument. The > >> > change exposes methods to access the map which return futures, rather > >> than > >> > exposing the map (and crucially its keys) directly. > >> > > >> > This is described in more detail in the [DISCUSS] thread. > >> > > >> > Please take a look and recast your votes: > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-183+-+Change+ > >> > PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand+to+use+AdminClient#KIP-183- > >> > ChangePreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommandtouseAdminClient-AdminClient: > >> > electPreferredLeaders() > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > > >> > Tom > >> > > >> > On 4 September 2017 at 10:52, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi Tom, > >> > > > >> > > You can update the KIP for minor things like that. Worth updating the > >> > > thread if it's something that is done during the PR review. > >> > > > >> > > With regards to exceptions, yes, that's definitely desired. I filed a > >> > JIRA > >> > > a while back for this: > >> > > > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5445 > >> > > > >> > > Ideally, new methods that we add would have this so that we don't > >> > increase > >> > > the tech debt that already exists. > >> > > > >> > > Ismael > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi Jun, > >> > > > > >> > > > You're correct about those other expected errors. If it's OK to > >> update > >> > > the > >> > > > KIP after the vote I'll add those. > >> > > > > >> > > > But this makes me wonder about the value of documenting expected > >> errors > >> > > in > >> > > > the Javadocs for the AdminClient (on the Results class, to be > >> > specific). > >> > > > Currently we don't do this, but it would be helpful for people using > >> > the > >> > > > AdminClient to know the kinds of errors they should expect, for > >> testing > >> > > > purposes for example. On the other hand it's a maintenance burden. > >> > Should > >> > > > we start documenting likely errors like this? > >> > > > > >> > > > Cheers, > >> > > > > >> > > > Tom > >> > > > > >> > > > On 4 September 2017 at 10:10, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > I see three +1s, no +0s and no -1, so the vote passes. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks to those who voted and/or commented on the discussion > >> thread. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 1 September 2017 at 07:36, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> Thank you! +1 (binding). > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 9:48 AM Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Hi, Tom, > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > Thanks for the KIP. +1. Just one more minor comment. It seems > >> that > >> > > the > >> > > > >> > ElectPreferredLeadersResponse > >> > > > >> > should expect at least 3 other types of errors : (1) request > >> > timeout > >> > > > >> > exception, (2) leader rebalance in-progress exception, (3) > >> can't > >> > > move > >> > > > to > >> > > > >> > the preferred replica exception (i.e., preferred replica not in > >> > sync > >> > > > >> yet). > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > Jun > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Tom Bentley < > >> > t.j.bent...@gmail.com > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Hi all, > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > I would like to start the vote on KIP-183 which will provide > >> an > >> > > > >> > AdminClient > >> > > > >> > > interface for electing the preferred replica, and refactor > >> the > >> > > > >> > > kafka-preferred-replica-election.sh tool to use this > >> interface. > >> > > > More > >> > > > >> > > details here: > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > >> > > 183+-+Change+ > >> > > > >> > > PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand+to+use+AdminClient > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Regards, > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Tom > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- Guozhang > >> > > > > >
