Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-950: Tiered Storage Disablement

2024-04-09 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
> > > > this is further supported by "*remote.log.disable.policy=delete:* > Logs > > > that > > > > are archived in the remote storage will not be part of the contiguous > > > > "active" log and will be deleted asynchronousl

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-950: Tiered Storage Disablement

2024-03-28 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
ation of the existing > > RemoteLogManagerScheduledThreadPool. > > > > 105. How is the behaviour with topic or partition deletion request > > handled when tiered storage disablement request is still being > > processed on a topic? > > > > ~Satish. > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-1025: Optionally URL-encode clientID and clientSecret in authorization header

2024-03-27 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
> production-grade authorization server uses https anyway and maybe users may > want to test using http in the dev environment. > > Thanks, > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 3:56 PM Doğuşcan Namal > wrote: > > > Hi Nelson, thanks for the KIP. > > > > From th

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-950: Tiered Storage Disablement

2024-03-25 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
gt; > > > > > > > I have caught up with Mehari offline and we have agreed that given > > Apache > > > > Kafka 4.0 being around the corner we would like to propose this > feature > > > > only for KRaft clusters. > > > > > > > > Any and

Re: [VOTE] KIP-1025: Optionally URL-encode clientID and clientSecret in authorization header

2024-03-20 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi Nelson, thanks for the KIP. >From the RFC: ``` The authorization server MUST require the use of TLS as described in Section 1.6 when sending requests using password authentication. ``` I believe we already have an enforcement for OAuth to be enabled only in SSLChannel but would be good to d

Re: [DISCUSS] Minimum constraint for segment.ms

2024-03-19 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi all, There are also message.max.bytes, replica.fetch.max.bytes and their derivatives requires a constraint on their maximum value as the maximum total memory on the instance. Otherwise, these could cause out of memory errors on the instance. Do you think this is in scope here as well? On Thu,

Re: [Discuss] KIP-1019: Expose method to determine Metric Measurability

2024-02-15 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
LGTM thanks for the KIP. +1(non-binding) On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 15:22, Andrew Schofield < andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: > Hi Apoorv, > Thanks for the KIP. Looks like a useful change to tidy up the metrics code. > > Thanks, > Andrew > > > On 14 Feb 2024, at 14:55, Apoorv Mittal > wro

Re: ZK vs KRaft benchmarking - latency differences?

2024-02-02 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
ned; but if you're not committed to that in your production > environment, there are other ways to scale up and out while retaining > ZooKeeper as your reliable configuration/metadata store. (It's also > cost-effective and latency-feasible to run a cross-AZ ZooKeeper cluster, > w

Re: ZK vs KRaft benchmarking - latency differences?

2024-02-01 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi Paul, I did some benchmarking as well and couldn't find a marginal difference between KRaft and Zookeeper on end to end latency from producers to consumers. I tested it on Kafka version 3.5.1 and used openmessaging's benchmarking framework https://openmessaging.cloud/docs/benchmarks/ . What I

RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-950: Tiered Storage Disablement

2024-01-09 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi everyone, any progress on the status of this KIP? Overall looks good to me but I wonder whether we still need to support it for Zookeeper mode given that it will be deprecated in the next 3 months. On 2023/07/21 20:16:46 "Beyene, Mehari" wrote: > Hi everyone, > I would like to start a discussio

Re: [VOTE] KIP-1000: List Client Metrics Configuration Resources

2023-11-16 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Thanks for the brief KIP Andrew. Having discussed the details in KIP-714, I see this is a natural follow up to that. +1(non-binding) On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 at 15:23, Andrew Schofield < andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: > Hi, > I’d like to start the voting for KIP-1000: List Client Metrics >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-982: Enhance Custom KafkaPrincipalBuilder to Access SslPrincipalMapper and KerberosShortNamer

2023-10-20 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi Raghu, Thanks for the short KIP. +1(non-binding) On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 at 23:56, Raghu B wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to start a vote on KIP-982, which proposed enhancements to > the Custom KafkaPrincipalBuilder to allow access to SslPrincipalMapper and > KerberosShortNamer. > > Thi

Re: Re: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-972: Add the metric of the current running version of kafka

2023-10-11 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hello, do we have a metric showing the uptime? We could tag that metric with version information as well. I like the idea of adding the version as a tag as well. However, I am not inclined to tag each metric with a KafkaVersion information. We could discuss which metrics could be tagged but let's

KRaft Performance Improvements

2023-10-03 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Do we have any performance test results showing the difference between KRaft vs Zookeeper? The one that I found online is from Redpanda comparing the tail latencies https://redpanda.com/blog/kafka-kraft-vs-redpanda-performance-2023#the-test:-redpanda-23.1-vs.-kafka-3.4.0-with-kraft Can I assume t

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-714: Client metrics and observability

2023-08-08 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
ompressed data is always supported. The KIP says: > "The CompressionType of NONE will not be > "present in the response from the broker, though the broker does support > uncompressed > "client telemetry if none of the accepted compression codecs are supported > by the clie

RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-714: Client metrics and observability

2023-08-04 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for this KIP. I was thinking of something similar so thanks for writing this down 😊 Couple of questions related to the design: 1. Can we investigate the option for using the Kraft controllers instead of the brokers for sending metrics? The disadvantage of sending these

Fwd: [DISCUSS] KIP-714: Client metrics and observability

2023-08-04 Thread Doğuşcan Namal
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for this KIP. I was thinking of something similar so thanks for writing this down 😊 Couple of questions related to the design: 1. Can we investigate the option for using the Kraft controllers instead of the brokers for sending metrics? The disadvantage of sending these