I've updated the KIP with a section on idempotence to reflect Ron's
comments in this thread. I'm going to open the vote thread shortly.
Thanks!
David
On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 7:04 PM Ron Dagostino wrote:
> Thanks, David. Yeah, I agree. I was more bringing it up to make sure we
> explicitly dis
Thanks, David. Yeah, I agree. I was more bringing it up to make sure we
explicitly discussed it.
Ron
> On Apr 16, 2021, at 2:15 PM, David Arthur wrote:
>
> Guozhang / Ismael, yes agreed on the plurality of the naming. I've updated
> the KIP.
>
> Ron, idempotent allocations are certainly pos
Guozhang / Ismael, yes agreed on the plurality of the naming. I've updated
the KIP.
Ron, idempotent allocations are certainly possible, but as you pointed out
it might not be needed. It would require some additional book-keeping by
the controller to recall what was the last producer ID block alloc
Hi Guozhang,
That was my original suggestion, so I am naturally +1 :)
Ismael
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:44 AM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Just putting my paranoid hat here :) Could we name the req/resp name as
> "AllocateProducerIds" instead of "AllocateProducerId"? Otherwise, LGTM!
>
Hi David,
Just putting my paranoid hat here :) Could we name the req/resp name as
"AllocateProducerIds" instead of "AllocateProducerId"? Otherwise, LGTM!
Guozhang
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 2:23 PM Ron Dagostino wrote:
> Hi David. I'm wondering if it might be a good idea to have the broker
> send
Hi David. I'm wondering if it might be a good idea to have the broker
send information about the last block it successfully received when it
requests a new block. As the RPC stands right now it can't be
idempotent -- it just tells the controller "provide me a new block,
please". One case where i
Oh, I see. Yes, my mistake -- I read it wrong. You are right that
all we need in the metadata log is the latest value allocated.
Ron
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 11:21 AM David Arthur wrote:
>
> Ron -- I considered making the RPC response and record use the same (or
> very similar) fields, but the u
Ron -- I considered making the RPC response and record use the same (or
very similar) fields, but the use case is slightly different. A broker
handling the RPC needs to know the bounds of the block since it has no idea
what the block size is. Also, the brokers will normally see non-contiguous
block
Thanks for the KIP, David.
With the RPC returning a start and length, should the record in the
metadata log do the same thing for consistency and to save the byte
per record?
Ron
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:06 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
>
> Great, thanks. Instead of calling it "bridge release", can w
Great, thanks. Instead of calling it "bridge release", can we say 3.0?
Ismael
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 7:48 PM David Arthur wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, Ismael. Renaming the RPC and using start+len
> instead of start+end sounds fine.
>
> And yes, the controller will allocate the IDs in ZK mo
Thanks for the feedback, Ismael. Renaming the RPC and using start+len
instead of start+end sounds fine.
And yes, the controller will allocate the IDs in ZK mode for the bridge
release.
I'll update the KIP to reflect these points.
Thanks!
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 7:30 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
> Sor
Sorry, one more question: the allocation of ids will be done by the
controller even in ZK mode, right?
Ismael
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 4:26 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
> One additional comment: if you return the number of ids instead of the end
> range, you can use an int32.
>
> Ismael
>
> On Tue, Apr
One additional comment: if you return the number of ids instead of the end
range, you can use an int32.
Ismael
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 4:25 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP, David. Any reason not to rename
> AllocateProducerIdBlockRequest to AllocateProducerIdsRequest?
>
> Ismael
>
> O
Thanks for the KIP, David. Any reason not to rename
AllocateProducerIdBlockRequest to AllocateProducerIdsRequest?
Ismael
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:51 PM David Arthur wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'd like to start the discussion for KIP-730
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/
Hello everyone,
I'd like to start the discussion for KIP-730
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-730%3A+Producer+ID+generation+in+KRaft+mode
This KIP proposes a new RPC for generating blocks of IDs for transactional
and idempotent producers.
Cheers,
David Arthur
15 matches
Mail list logo
