Hey Stanislav, Thanks for the feedback! I do think we should try to keep the scope of this KIP small. The idea you proposed is orthogonal, though, so if you wanted to write up a quick KIP concurrently, I'd be happy to review it.
Regarding deprecation: yes, the metrics are in the public interface, because they are not inside a package named `internal`. Therefore, we do need to do deprecations and migrations when considering changes to them. I wish we didn't, since it could be a cleaner transition without them, but we shouldn't risk breaking source compatibility. Thanks, -John On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 1:30 PM Stanislav Kozlovski <stanis...@confluent.io> wrote: > > Hello, > > Thanks for the KIP, I'm happy we're converging on implementations. > > I was wondering whether we need to deprecate the old metrics - are those > classes public interfaces? I see we don't build a JavaDoc for them ( > https://kafka.apache.org/22/javadoc/allclasses-noframe.html) and, as far as > I know, that means we don't necessarily need to go with the deprecation > route. > > I think we also have the Measurable and Gauge classes which seem to do the > same thing. From the names, I intuitively thought that Measurable indicates > something that might require some amount of processing to get the value of > and Gauge to be something that is instantly read. Reading their usages, > though, I see that is not the case. Measurable is inherited by > MeasurableStat which itself is inherited by most of the classes you > mentioned in the KIP. Is it worth it converging on those as well (perhaps > deprecating/removing Measurable and opting for Gauge) or do we prefer to > keep the scope of this KIP small? > > Thanks, > Stanislav > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 7:42 PM John Roesler <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > Hey, thanks Matthias and Bruno, > > > > I agree, "Cumulative" is a mouthful. "TotalX" sounds fine to me. > > > > Also, yes, I would have liked to not have any modifier for > > "non-sampled", but there is a name conflict with Sum. > > > > I'll update the KIP to reflect "TotalX" and then start the vote thread. > > > > Thanks again, > > -John > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 11:27 AM Bruno Cadonna <br...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > > OK, makes sense. Then, I am in favour of TotalCount and TotalSum. > > > > > > Best, > > > Bruno > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 12:57 AM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > `Sum` is an existing name, for the "sampled sum" metric, that gets > > > > deprecated. Hence, we cannot use it. > > > > > > > > If we cannot use `Sum` and use `TotalSum`, we should also not use > > > > `Count` but `TotalCount` for consistency. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/11/19 12:58 PM, Bruno Cadonna wrote: > > > > > Hi John, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for the KIP. > > > > > > > > > > LGTM > > > > > > > > > > I also do not like CumulativeSum/Count so much. I propose to just > > call > > > > > it Sum and Count. > > > > > > > > > > I understand that you want to unequivocally distinguish the two > > metric > > > > > functions by their names, but I have the feeling the names become > > > > > artificially complex. The exact semantics can also be documented in > > > > > the javadocs, which btw could also be improved in those classes. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Bruno > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:25 PM Matthias J. Sax < > > matth...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> Thanks for the KIP. Overall LGTM. > > > > >> > > > > >> The only though I have is, if we may want to use `TotalSum` and > > > > >> `TotalCount` instead of `CumulativeSum/Count` as names? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> -Matthias > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 7/11/19 9:31 AM, John Roesler wrote: > > > > >>> Hi Kafka devs, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I'd like to propose KIP-488 as a minor cleanup of some of our > > metric > > > > >>> implementations. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> KIP-488: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/kkAyBw > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Over time, iterative updates to these metrics has resulted in a > > pretty > > > > >>> confusing little collection of classes, and I've personally been > > > > >>> involved in three separate moderately time-consuming iterations of > > me > > > > >>> or someone else trying to work out which metrics are available, and > > > > >>> which ones are desired for a given use case. One of these was > > actually > > > > >>> a long-running bug in Kafka Streams' metrics, so not only has this > > > > >>> confusion been a time sink, but it has also led to bugs. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I'm hoping this change won't be too controversial. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > >>> -John > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
