Downgradability affected by KIP-211/KAFKA-4682?

2018-10-04 Thread Jonghyun Lee
Hello, KIP-211/KAFKA-4682 introduced a new offset value schema, OFFSET_COMMIT_VALUE_SCHEMA_v2 in GroupMetadataManager.scala. This new schema is used for offset commit messages if inter.broker.protocol.version is set to >= 2.1 AND OffsetAndMetadata does not contain explicit expireTimestamp (in Off

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-05-07 Thread Jonghyun Lee
> have clients mute themselves. So perhaps we don't need the protocol change? > > > On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 12:49 AM, Jonghyun Lee wrote: > > > Per Rajini's request, I'd like to add one more discussion item. > > > > I added the THROTTLE_TIME

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-05-04 Thread Jonghyun Lee
anks, Jon On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Jonghyun Lee wrote: > Hi Magnus and Jun, do you have any feedback on this? > > Since two of the original voters (Becket and Rajini) showed a preference > for bumping up all request versions, I'll wait till tomorrow and start > imple

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-05-02 Thread Jonghyun Lee
rrent plan is to add a method to AbstractResponse which tells whether or not client should throttle and have an implementation in each response type based on its version. Thanks, Jon On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 9:15 AM, Jonghyun Lee wrote: > Hi Rajini, > > Thanks for letting me know the SA

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-04-30 Thread Jonghyun Lee
ter? > > Hi Magnus, It will be good to know what works better for non-Java clients. > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Jonghyun Lee wrote: > > > Thanks, Becket. > > > > Assuming that requiring new client implementations to issue > > ApiVersionsRequest

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-04-27 Thread Jonghyun Lee
s of > each broker, which may have some complexity. Also this seems introduces the > behavior dependency between different requests, which seems unnecessary. > > Due to the above reasons, I think it might be better to bump up all the > request versions. > > Thanks, > > Jia

Re: [VOTE] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-04-25 Thread Jonghyun Lee
Hello, Per Ismael's suggestion, I'd like to get comments from the original voters for KIP-219 (Becket, Jun, Rajini) and others about the new interface change proposed in the discussion thread ( https://markmail.org/search/?q=kafka+KIP-219#query:kafka%20KIP-219+page:1+mid:5rwju2gwpicojr3f+state:res

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-04-25 Thread Jonghyun Lee
thread >> as well so that the people who voted originally have a chance to comment. >> Also, we should really get input from developers of Kafka clients >> (librdkafka, kafka-python, etc.) for this KIP. >> >> Ismael >> >> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Jong

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-219 - Improve Quota Communication

2018-04-05 Thread Jonghyun Lee
Hi, I have been implementing KIP-219. I discussed the interface changes with Becket Qin and Dong Lin, and we decided to bump up the protocol version of ApiVersionsRequest and ApiVersionsResponse only, instead of bumping up all requests/responses that may be throttled, to indicate clients whether o