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

Thanks for all this work, Konstantine. I have a question about when a member leaves. Here's the partial scenario, repeated from the KIP: Initial group and assignment: W1([AC0, AT1]), W2([AT2, BC0]), W3([BT1]) Config topic contains: AC0, AT1, AT2, BC0, BT1 W2 leaves Rebalance is triggered W1 join

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3330

See Changes: [vahid.hashemian] Fix Javadoc of KafkaConsumer (#6155) -- [...truncated 2.27 MB...] org.apache.kafka.streams.test.OutputVerifierTest > shouldFailIfValueIsDif

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk11 #227

See Changes: [vahid.hashemian] Fix Javadoc of KafkaConsumer (#6155) -- [...truncated 2.27 MB...] org.apache.kafka.streams.StreamsConfigTest > shouldThrowExceptionIfCommit

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk11 #226

See Changes: [github] KAFKA-6455: Extend CacheFlushListener to forward timestamp (#6147) -- [...truncated 2.27 MB...] org.apache.kafka.connect.transforms.CastTest > castW

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3329

See Changes: [github] KAFKA-6455: Extend CacheFlushListener to forward timestamp (#6147) -- [...truncated 2.27 MB...] org.apache.kafka.connect.converters.ByteArrayConvert

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-158: Kafka Connect should allow source connectors to set topic-specific settings for new topics

Hi, Thanks again for all of the feedback. Based upon this feedback, I do agree that we should indeed just solve the simple problem for the vast majority of use cases that only require a few simple properties. I believe I was the only person advocating for a more general and flexible solution, but

Re: [DISCUSS] Kafka 2.2.0 in February 2018

Thanks you all! Added 291, 379, 389, and 420 for tracking. -Matthias On 1/19/19 6:32 AM, Dongjin Lee wrote: > Hi Matthias, > > Thank you for taking the lead. KIP-389[^1] was accepted last week[^2], so > it seems like to be included. > > Thanks, > Dongjin > > [^1]: > https://cwiki.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] KIP-420: Add Single Value Fetch in Session Stores

Thanks for the KIP Guozhang! Would it make sense to add a default implementation for the new method? I am not sure, and I actually think it would not make sense: - Kafka Streams provided stores will implement the method anyway - Kafka Streams relies on a proper implementation for custom stores

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-390: Add producer option to adjust compression level

Hi Dongjin, For topic level, you can only have a single compression type so the way it was before was fine, right? The point you raise is how to set broker defaults that vary depending on the compression type, correct? Ismael On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:18 AM Dongjin Lee wrote: > I just realize

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-390: Add producer option to adjust compression level

I just updated the draft PR. Please have a look when you are free. Following the update, I have a minor update to the KIP document - 'compression.snappy.level' and 'compression.zstd.buffer.size' were removed since these options are meaningless. (Snappy doesn't support compression level, and zstd d

Re: [DISCUSS] Kafka 2.2.0 in February 2018

Hi Matthias, Thank you for taking the lead. KIP-389[^1] was accepted last week[^2], so it seems like to be included. Thanks, Dongjin [^1]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-389%3A+Introduce+a+configurable+consumer+group+size+limit [^2]: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/53

Re: [DISCUSS] Kafka 2.2.0 in February 2018

KIP-379? On Fri, 18 Jan 2019, 22:33 Matthias J. Sax Just a quick update on the release. > > > We have 22 KIP atm: > > 81, 207, 258, 289, 313, 328, 331, 339, 341, 351, 359, 361, 367, 368, > 371, 376, 377, 380, 386, 393, 394, 414 > > Let me know if I missed any KIP that is targeted for 2.2 release.

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-2.1-jdk8 #109

See Changes: [ismael] MINOR: Log partition info when creating new request batch in controller -- [...truncated 911.65 KB...] kafka.security.auth.SimpleAclAuthorizerTest > tes