Given that the conversation has lingered for a bit, I've gone ahead and
opened up a PR with the initial implementation. Let me know your thoughts!
https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5002
Also, voting is open - so if you like this idea please send me some binding
+1's before May 22nd so we can g
Hello all, I've updated a KIP again to add a few sentences about the
general problem we were facing in the motivation section. Please let me
know if there is any further feedback.
On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> Hey Randall,
>
> Devil's advocate sparring is always a fun game
Hey Randall,
Devil's advocate sparring is always a fun game so I'm down. =)
Rebalance caused by connectivity failure is the case that caused us to
notice the issue. But the issue
is really more about giving connectors the tools to facilitate rebalances
or a Kafka connect shutdown
cleanly. Perhaps
Matt,
Let me play devil's advocate. Do we need this additional complexity? The
motivation section talked about needing to deal with task failures due to
connectivity problems. Generally speaking, isn't it possible that if one
task has connectivity problems with either the broker or the external
sy
I have made the requested updates to the KIP! :)
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:02 AM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> Ugh
>
> * I can update
>
> I need more caffeine...
>
> On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Matt Farmer wrote:
>
>> I'm can update the rejected alternatives section as you describe.
>>
>> Also, ad
Ugh
* I can update
I need more caffeine...
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> I'm can update the rejected alternatives section as you describe.
>
> Also, adding a paragraph to the preCommit javadoc also seems like a
> Very Very Good Idea™ so I'll make that update to the KIP
I'm can update the rejected alternatives section as you describe.
Also, adding a paragraph to the preCommit javadoc also seems like a
Very Very Good Idea™ so I'll make that update to the KIP as well.
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Randall Hauch wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP proposal, Matt.
>
>
Thanks for the KIP proposal, Matt.
You mention in the "Rejected Alternatives" section that you considered
changing the signature of the `preCommit` method but rejected it because it
would break backward compatibility. Strictly speaking, it is possible to do
this without breaking compatibility by i
I looked at WorkerSinkTask and it seems using a boolean for KIP-275 should
suffice for now.
Thanks
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> Hey Ted,
>
> I have not, actually!
>
> Do you think that we're likely to add multiple states here soon?
>
> My instinct is to keep it simple u
Hey Ted,
I have not, actually!
Do you think that we're likely to add multiple states here soon?
My instinct is to keep it simple until there are multiple states that we
would want
to consider. I really like the simplicity of just getting a boolean and the
implementation of WorkerSinkTask already
The enhancement gives SinkTaskContext state information.
Have you thought of exposing the state retrieval as an enum (initially with
two values) ?
Thanks
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:55 PM, Matt Farmer wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I am proposing KIP-275 to improve Connect's SinkTaskContext so that Sin
Hello all,
I am proposing KIP-275 to improve Connect's SinkTaskContext so that Sinks
can be informed
in their preCommit hook if the hook is being invoked as a part of a
rebalance or Connect
shutdown.
The KIP is here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=75977607
Pleas
12 matches
Mail list logo
