Yeah I think it is better to discuss these points in the KIP meeting, or it
may become a long thread. Let's do that this Tuesday.
Guozhang
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Guozhang,
>
> Perhaps we can discuss this in our KIP hangout next week?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jun
>
> On Tue, Ju
Guozhang,
Perhaps we can discuss this in our KIP hangout next week?
Thanks,
Jun
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> This email is to kick-off some discussion around the changes we want to
> make on the new consumer APIs as well as their semantics. Here are a
> not-comprehen
Just a minor correction, but #2 is KAFKA-2168 and #3 is KAFKA-2123.
For #1, I think there should be some minimal effort to making the poll
respect the timeout (with the understanding that spurious wakeups can
happen). I think this really just means calling NetworkClient.poll() in a
loop and checki
My two cents:
Overall I think our focus as far as extensions go should be on (1) things
which would be incompatible if changed later and (2) operationalization.
There are lots of new apis that could be nice to have, but I think if
adding them later will just be an api addition we should hold off a
Thanks for kicking off this discussion, Guozhang.
We might also want to discuss the API to expose the high watermark. Some
discussion has been there in KAFKA-2076.
Thanks,
Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
On 6/9/15, 1:12 PM, "Guozhang Wang" wrote:
>This email is to kick-off some discussion around the cha
This email is to kick-off some discussion around the changes we want to
make on the new consumer APIs as well as their semantics. Here are a
not-comprehensive list of items in my mind:
1. Poll(timeout): current definition of timeout states "The time, in
milliseconds, spent waiting in poll if data
