Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-10-08 Thread Jiangjie Qin
Thanks a lot for the reply, Jun. Yes, during implementation we can validate the version configurations to make sure they make sense. Since there haven't been objections in a couple of days. I am just closing this KIP with a pass. KIP-31 is passed with four +1(binding), four +1(non binding) and no

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-10-08 Thread Jun Rao
The updated upgrade path looks reasonable to me. Not all combinations of the configs are valid though. For example, we probably should disallow message.format.version=1 and intra.cluster.protocol = 0.9.0. Thanks, Jun On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jiangjie Qin wrote: > Hi folks, > > Sorry for

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-10-06 Thread Dong Lin
+1 Dong On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Jiangjie Qin wrote: > Hi folks, > > Sorry for this prolonged voting session and thanks for the votes. > > There is an additional broker configuration change added to the KIP after > the vote. We propose to add a message.format.version configuration to the

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-10-06 Thread Jiangjie Qin
Hi folks, Sorry for this prolonged voting session and thanks for the votes. There is an additional broker configuration change added to the KIP after the vote. We propose to add a message.format.version configuration to the broker to indicate which version it should use to store the message on di

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-25 Thread Ewen Cheslack-Postava
+1 -Ewen On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Jun Rao wrote: > +1. I agree that it's worth thinking through the migration plan a bit more. > > Thanks, > > Jun > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Joel Koshy wrote: > > > +1 on everything but the upgrade plan, which is a bit scary - will > > commen

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-25 Thread Jun Rao
+1. I agree that it's worth thinking through the migration plan a bit more. Thanks, Jun On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Joel Koshy wrote: > +1 on everything but the upgrade plan, which is a bit scary - will > comment on the discuss thread. > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Mayuresh Gharat

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-24 Thread Joel Koshy
+1 on everything but the upgrade plan, which is a bit scary - will comment on the discuss thread. On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Mayuresh Gharat wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > >> ＋1 >> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Aditya Auradkar < >> aaurad...@

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-24 Thread Mayuresh Gharat
+1 On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > ＋1 > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Aditya Auradkar < > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Neha Narkhede > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Todd

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Guozhang Wang
＋1 On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Aditya Auradkar < aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Todd Palino wrote: > > > > > +1000 > > > > > > ! > > > > > > -Todd > > > > > > On Wednesd

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Jay Kreps
I'm +1 though that is dependent on having a graceful migration path for people. -Jay On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Jiangjie Qin wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks a lot for the reviews and feedback on KIP-31. It looks all the > concerns of the KIP has been addressed. I would like to start the voting >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Aditya Auradkar
+1 On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Todd Palino wrote: > > > +1000 > > > > ! > > > > -Todd > > > > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015, Jiangjie Qin > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Thanks a lot for the reviews and feedback on K

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Neha Narkhede
+1 On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Todd Palino wrote: > +1000 > > ! > > -Todd > > On Wednesday, September 23, 2015, Jiangjie Qin > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Thanks a lot for the reviews and feedback on KIP-31. It looks all the > > concerns of the KIP has been addressed. I would like to start th

Re: [VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Todd Palino
+1000 ! -Todd On Wednesday, September 23, 2015, Jiangjie Qin wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks a lot for the reviews and feedback on KIP-31. It looks all the > concerns of the KIP has been addressed. I would like to start the voting > process. > > The short summary for the KIP: > We are going to use the

[VOTE] KIP-31 - Move to relative offsets in compressed message sets.

2015-09-23 Thread Jiangjie Qin
Hi, Thanks a lot for the reviews and feedback on KIP-31. It looks all the concerns of the KIP has been addressed. I would like to start the voting process. The short summary for the KIP: We are going to use the relative offset in the message format to avoid server side recompression. In case you