Hi Jun,
Thank you, that makes sense. Updated the KIP.
Regards,
Rajini
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Hi, Rajini,
>
> Thanks for the updated KIP. Should be also track the conversion time for
> the producer? If so, the name can just be MessageConversionTimeMs and only
> the
Hi, Rajini,
Thanks for the updated KIP. Should be also track the conversion time for
the producer? If so, the name can just be MessageConversionTimeMs and only
the produce and the fetch request may have such a component.
Jun
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Jun,
>
> Tha
Hi Rajini,
Yes, It provides the failure rate for all errors. I got confused with old
metric names.
Thank you for the clarification.
Thanks
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Hi Manikumar,
>
> We currently have topic-level metrics for FailedProduceRequestsPerSec,
> Failed
Hi Roger,
Yes, the rate metrics `successful-authentication-rate` and `
failed-authentication-rate` will also have corresponding
failed-authentication-count and successful-authentication-count to match
KIP 187.
Thank you,
Rajini
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Roger Hoover
wrote:
> Great sugg
Hi Manikumar,
We currently have topic-level metrics for FailedProduceRequestsPerSec,
FailedFetchRequestsPerSec. For all requests including produce/fetch, this
KIP adds a new error rate metric:
MBean:
kafka.network:type=RequestMetrics,name=ErrorsPerSec,request=api_key_name,error=error_code_name
F
Hi,
Currently, we have FailedProduceRequestsPerSec, FailedFetchRequestsPerSec
metrics to indicate
un-expected failures on a broker while handling producer/fetch requests.
Will it be useful to add these
metrics for other requests also? I don't want to include these metrics to
this KIP. Just want to
Jun,
Thank you, your suggestions sound good. I have updated the KIP.
Regards,
Rajini
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:12 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Hi, Rajini,
>
> Thanks for the updated KIP. I agree that those additional metrics can be
> useful. I was thinking what would an admin do if the value of one o
Hi, Rajini,
Thanks for the updated KIP. I agree that those additional metrics can be
useful. I was thinking what would an admin do if the value of one of
those metrics is abnormal. An admin probably want to determine which client
causes the abnormaly. So, a couple of more comments below.
10. Abo
Great suggestions, Ismael and thanks for incorporating them, Rajini.
Tracking authentication success and failures (#3) across listeners seems
very useful for cluster administrators to identify misconfigured client or
bad actors, especially until all clients implement KIP-152 which will add
an expl
Hi Ismael,
Thank you for the suggestions. The additional metrics sound very useful and
I have added them to the KIP.
Regards,
Rajini
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Hi Rajini,
>
> There are a few other metrics that could potentially be useful. I'd be
> interested in what
Hi Rajini,
There are a few other metrics that could potentially be useful. I'd be
interested in what you and the community thinks:
1. The KIP currently includes `FetchDownConversionsPerSec`, which is
useful. In the common case, one would want to avoid down conversion by
using the lower message fo
Hi, Rajini,
Yes, if those error metrics are registered dynamically, we could worry
about expiration later.
Thanks,
Jun
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Perhaps we could register dynamically for now. If we find that the cost of
> retaining these is high, we can add the
Hi all,
We can discuss the expiry implementation as part of the PR review. If there
are no further comments, I will start vote on this KIP tomorrow. Please let
me know if there are any other concerns.
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Perhaps we could register dynamically
Perhaps we could register dynamically for now. If we find that the cost of
retaining these is high, we can add the code to expire them later. Is that
ok?
Regards,
Rajini
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Can we quantify the cost of having these metrics around if they are
Can we quantify the cost of having these metrics around if they are
dynamically registered? Given that the maximum is bounded at development
time, is it really worth all the extra code?
Ismael
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:34 AM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Jun,
>
> It feels more consistent to add erro
Jun,
It feels more consistent to add errors as yammer metrics similar to other
request metrics. Perhaps we could add some code to track and remove these
if unused? It is a bit more work, but it would keep the externals
consistent.
Ismael/Manikumar,
Agree that version as a String attribute makes
I agree it will be good if we can add "commit id/version" as an
attribute value.
It will be easy to parse. But as of now, KafkaMetric supports only
numerical values.
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 5:49 AM, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Hi Rajini,
>
> About the gauges, I was thinking that the attribute would be
Hi Rajini,
About the gauges, I was thinking that the attribute would be the value
(i.e. commit id or version). I understand that Kafka Metrics doesn't
support this (unlike Yammer Metrics), but would it make sense to add?
Ismael
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Hi Ismael
Hi, Rajini,
1. Yammer doesn't seem to support expiration. I guess we can use the Kafka
metric in this case.
Thanks,
Jun
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Roger Hoover
wrote:
> Rajini,
>
> The table is super helpful. Thank you.
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram
> wrote:
>
>
Rajini,
The table is super helpful. Thank you.
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram
wrote:
> Hi Roger,
>
> Thank you for the review. I have added a table with the scope of errors
> counted for each request.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Roger Hoover
Hi Ismael,
Thank you for the review.
1. Agree on keeping it simple with dynamic registration and no expiry. Will
wait for Jun's feedback before updating KIP.
2. I have switched to two metrics for commit-id and version (not sure if it
matches what you meant). I also added the client-id tag which i
Thanks for the KIP, Rajini. I think this is helpful too. A few minor
comments.
1. About the number of metrics and expiration, if we dynamically register
metrics for the error codes, the number is likely to be much lower than
30*30, probably less than 100. If we were using Kafka Metrics for this, w
Hi Jun,
Thank you for the review.
1. Makes sense. I have updated the KIP.
2. Moved to a new group ZooKeeperClient
3. It is a gauge, so it will have a single attribute called Value with a
constant value of 1.
Regards,
Rajini
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Hi, Rajini,
>
> Th
Hi Roger,
Thank you for the review. I have added a table with the scope of errors
counted for each request.
Regards,
Rajini
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Roger Hoover
wrote:
> I think it would useful to make clear somewhere for each metric, the level
> at which it's counted. I don't know
Hi, Rajini,
Thanks for the KIP. A few comments.
1. We have 30+ requests and 30+ error code and growing. So, the combination
can be large. Perhaps it's useful to expire an error metric if it's no
longer updated after some time? We did something similar for the quota
metric.
2. It's a bit weird to
I think it would useful to make clear somewhere for each metric, the level
at which it's counted. I don't know all the details of the Kafka protocol
but it might be something like
ProduceRequest, Fetch Request - counted at per-partition level
All other requests are 1:1 with client requests?
Chee
Rajini,
Thank you for the KIP. These are very helpful additions. One question on
the error code metrics:
Will the total error counting happen at the the level of topic partition?
For example, if a single ProduceRequest contains messages to append to 3
partitions and say all 3 appends are succes
I have created a KIP to add some additional metrics to support health
checks:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-188+-+Add+new+metrics+to+support+health+checks
Feedback and suggestions are welcome.
Regards,
Rajini
28 matches
Mail list logo
