Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3308

See Changes: [me] MINOR: Support choosing different JVMs when running integration tests [jason] KAFKA-7609; Add Protocol Generator for Kafka (#5893) -- [...truncated 4.52

Re: [VOTE] KIP-382 MirrorMaker 2.0

Hi Ryanne, Thanks for the KIP and patient discussion. +1 from me as well. Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 1:11 AM Jun Rao wrote: > Hi, Ryanne, > > Thanks for the explanation. All make sense to me now. +1 on the KIP from > me. > > Jun > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 7:16 PM Ryanne Dola

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-2.0-jdk8 #213

See Changes: [wangguoz] KAFKA-7741: streams-scala - document dependency workaround (#6125) -- [...truncated 437.97 KB...] kafka.zk.ReassignPartitionsZNodeTest > testDecodeVal

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-trunk-jdk11 #204

See

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3307

See

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-2.1-jdk8 #105

See Changes: [me] MINOR: Support choosing different JVMs when running integration tests -- [...truncated 914.43 KB...] kafka.server.epoch.LeaderEpochIntegrationTest > shoul

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk11 #203

See Changes: [wangguoz] MINOR: Need to have same wait as verify timeout broker upgrade downgrade [colin] KAFKA-7790: Fix Bugs in Trogdor Task Expiration (#6103) [github] HOTFIX: Compilation error in CommandLin

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-411: Add option to make Kafka Connect task client ID values unique

Hi everyone. We seem to have agreement that the ideal approach is to alter the default client ids. Now I'm wondering about the best process to proceed. Will the change in default behaviour require a new KIP, given it will affect existing deployments? Would I be best to repurpose this KIP-411, or

[DISCUSS] KIP-415: Incremental Cooperative Rebalancing in Kafka Connect

Hi all, I just published KIP-415: Incremental Cooperative Rebalancing in Kafka Connect on the wiki here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals This is the first KIP to suggest an implementation of incremental and cooperative rebalancing in the context of Ka

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

Hi Guozhang, I have updated the PR as well as the KIP. I should add more unit tests to covers all new methods. However, I still have one test in failure. The reason is that using Joined.name() in both potential repartition topic and processor nodes leads to topology-incompatible. How should we de

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3306

See Changes: [wangguoz] MINOR: Need to have same wait as verify timeout broker upgrade downgrade -- [...truncated 3.64 MB...] org.apache.kafka.connect.transforms.SetSche

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-258: Allow to Store Record Timestamps in RocksDB

Hi Matthias, Thanks for the KIP, it goes into good detail and is well done. Overall I'm a +1 on the KIP and have one minor question. Regarding the upgrade path, we'll use two column families to do a lazy conversion which makes sense to me. What is the plan to get rid of the "legacy" column fami

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3305

See Changes: [harsha] KAFKA-6627: Prevent config default values overriding ones specified -- [...truncated 3.64 MB...] org.apache.kafka.connect.runtime.ConnectMetricsTest

[DISCUSS] Notify SourceTask of ACK'd offsets, metadata

Hey y'all, Please review the following small KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-414%3A+Notify+SourceTask+of+ACK%27d+offsets%2C+metadata Thanks! Ryanne

Re: KIP-213 - Scalable/Usable Foreign-Key KTable joins - Rebooted.

Hi Jan, Thanks for the reply. It sounds like your larger point is that if we provide a building block instead of the whole operation, then it's not too hard for users to implement the whole operation, and maybe the building block is independently useful. This is a very fair point. In fact, it's

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-7815) SourceTask should expose ACK'd offsets, metadata

Ryanne Dolan created KAFKA-7815: --- Summary: SourceTask should expose ACK'd offsets, metadata Key: KAFKA-7815 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7815 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Impr

Fix DK 8 and Scala 2.11 failure reported by Jenkin?

Hey, I have a simple PR https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5989/files, it always failed for JDK 8 and Scala 2.11 in jenkin build. I have been trying to repro with the local build (like ./gradlew -PscalaVersion=2.12 test or set Java_HOME etc), but it always build and test successfully for me lo

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-392: Allow consumers to fetch from the closest replica

Hi, Jason, Thanks for the updated KIP. Looks good overall. Just a few minor comments. 20. For case 2, if the consumer receives an OFFSET_NOT_AVAILABLE, I am wondering if the consumer should refresh the metadata before retrying. This can allow the consumer to switch to an in-sync replica sooner.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-382: MirrorMaker 2.0

Becket, I agree we should strive for (2), but it's not really necessary for at-least-once delivery, especially within the context of cross-cluster migration and failover, where timescales are generally greater than we'd expect within a single cluster. Being able to failover without rewinding more t

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-258: Allow to Store Record Timestamps in RocksDB

Hi Matthias, Thanks for the updates to the KIP. I've just read it over, and am personally quite happy with it. Thanks for tackling this dicey issue and putting in a huge amount of design work to produce a smooth upgrade path for DSL users. Thanks, -John On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 10:35 AM Matthias

Re: [VOTE] KIP-389: Introduce a configurable consumer group size limit

+1 (non-binding) Thanks for the great work! Get Outlook for iOS From: Gwen Shapira Sent: Friday, January 11, 2019 9:13 AM To: dev Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-389: Introduce a configurable consumer group size limit +1 Thank you for driving thi

Re: [VOTE] KIP-389: Introduce a configurable consumer group size limit

+1 Thank you for driving this change! On Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 1:09 AM Stanislav Kozlovski Hey folks, > > I'd like to initiate a vote thread about KIP-389 > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-389%3A+Introduce+a+configurable+consumer+group+size+limit > > > . > > -- > Best, > St

Re: [VOTE] - KIP-213 (new vote) - Simplified and revised.

Thanks all - So far that's +2 Binding, +2 non-binding If we get a few more votes I can likely get this out as part of the Kafka 2.2 release, as the KIP Freeze is Jan 24, 2019. The current PR I have could be modified to match the PR in short order. Adam On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 7:11 AM Damian Gu

Re: [VOTE] KIP-349 Priorities for Source Topics

Hi Colin Thanks for the sober second thought - I actually didn't see the inconclusive parts of the DISCUSS (I must have missed them when going through) so I am grateful you highlighted these. I will have to remove my +1 in light of the issues Colin has mentioned, but I will follow the discussion m

Re: [VOTE] KIP-414: Expose Embedded ClientIds in Kafka Streams

Thanks for the KIP Guozhang, +1 for me. On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 7:10 AM Damian Guy wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 05:09, John Roesler wrote: > > > Hi Guozhang, > > > > It sounds reasonable to me. I'm +1 (nonbinding). > > > > -John > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:51 PM Guozhang Wang w

Re: Delayed messages with skewed data when subscribing to many partitions

After some further research I think I answered at least part of this myself. KIP-74 [1] states the following about ordering of partitions in the fetch request: "The solution is to reorder partitions in fetch request in round-robin fashion to continue fetching from first empty partition received or

Re: [VOTE] - KIP-213 (new vote) - Simplified and revised.

+1 binding On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 at 16:57, Bill Bejeck wrote: > +1 from me. Great job on the KIP. > > -Bill > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:35 AM John Roesler wrote: > > > It's a +1 (nonbinding) from me as well. > > > > Thanks for sticking with this, Adam! > > -John > > > > On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at

Re: [VOTE] KIP-414: Expose Embedded ClientIds in Kafka Streams

+1 On Fri, 11 Jan 2019 at 05:09, John Roesler wrote: > Hi Guozhang, > > It sounds reasonable to me. I'm +1 (nonbinding). > > -John > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 8:51 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > > > I'd like to start a voting process for the following KIP: > > > > > > > https://c

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-7814) Broker shut down while cleaning up log file

EverZhang created KAFKA-7814: Summary: Broker shut down while cleaning up log file Key: KAFKA-7814 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7814 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Bug C

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-7813) JmxTool throws NPE when --object-name is omitted

Attila Sasvari created KAFKA-7813: - Summary: JmxTool throws NPE when --object-name is omitted Key: KAFKA-7813 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7813 Project: Kafka Issue Type:

[VOTE] KIP-389: Introduce a configurable consumer group size limit

Hey folks, I'd like to initiate a vote thread about KIP-389 . -- Best, Stanislav

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-7812) Deadlock in SaslServerAuthenticator related threads

Abhi created KAFKA-7812: --- Summary: Deadlock in SaslServerAuthenticator related threads Key: KAFKA-7812 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7812 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Bug Com