Thanks everyone for your votes.
+1 from myself (binding).
I'm closing this voting thread now with the following tally:
binding +1: 4 (Bill, Matthias, Jason, Guozhang)
non-binding +1: 6 (Boyang, Mickael, Kamal, Bruno, Manna, Tom)
Thanks,
Guozhang
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 11:02 AM Jason Gustafs
Hi Guozhang,
That's a fair point. I think originally `committed` just hit the local
cache. For EOS, we changed it to send a request on every call since the
updated value came from outside the consumer. Given that, I think it is
reasonable to push users toward the batch API.
+1
-Jason
On Thu, Se
+1 (non-binding).
Thanks!
On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 9:58 AM M. Manna wrote:
> Gushing,
>
> Good kip. +1 (binding) from me.
>
> Thanks,
> MAnna
>
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 09:55, Bruno Cadonna wrote:
>
> > Guozhang, Thanks for the KIP.
> >
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Bruno
> >
> > On We
Gushing,
Good kip. +1 (binding) from me.
Thanks,
MAnna
On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 09:55, Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> Guozhang, Thanks for the KIP.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Bruno
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 9:17 AM Kamal Chandraprakash
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the KIP!
> >
> > LGTM, +1 (non-
Guozhang, Thanks for the KIP.
+1 (non-binding)
Best,
Bruno
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 9:17 AM Kamal Chandraprakash
wrote:
>
> Thanks for the KIP!
>
> LGTM, +1 (non-binding).
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 3:23 AM Matthias J. Sax
> wrote:
>
> > I don't have a strong preference. So I am also fine to d
Thanks for the KIP!
LGTM, +1 (non-binding).
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 3:23 AM Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> I don't have a strong preference. So I am also fine to deprecate the
> existing methods. Let's see what Jason thinks.
>
> Can you update the KIP to reflect the semantics of the return `Map` (ie,
I don't have a strong preference. So I am also fine to deprecate the
existing methods. Let's see what Jason thinks.
Can you update the KIP to reflect the semantics of the return `Map` (ie,
does only contain entries for partitions with committed offsets, and
does not contain `null` values)?
+1 (b
Hi Jason / Matthias,
I understand your concerns now. Just to clarify my main motivation on
deprecating the old APIs is not only for aesthetics (confess I personally
do have preference on succinct APIs), but to urge people to use the batched
API for better latency when possible --- as stated in the
Thanks for the KIP Guozhang.
> Another reason is that other functions of KafkaConsumers do not have those
> overloaded functions to be consistent
I tend to agree with Jason about keeping the existing methods. Your
argument does not seem to hold. I just checked the `Consumer` API, and
it's mix of
> I feel it not worth making committed to have both plurals and singulars.
Not sure I agree. If we had started with these new APIs from the beginning,
that may have been better, but we already have exposed the singular APIs
and users are depending on them. Not sure it's worth breaking compatibili
Thanks Jason!
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 9:07 AM Jason Gustafson wrote:
> Hi Guozhang,
>
> I think the motivation for the new API makes sense. I've wanted something
> like this in the past. That said, do you think there is a substantial
> benefit from deprecating the old API? I can still see it bei
Hi Guozhang,
I think the motivation for the new API makes sense. I've wanted something
like this in the past. That said, do you think there is a substantial
benefit from deprecating the old API? I can still see it being convenient
in some cases and it's no real cost to maintain.
Also, just a mino
Thanks for the KIP Guozhang.
+1 (binding)
-Bill
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 9:09 AM Mickael Maison
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding), thanks Guozhang
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:14 AM Boyang Chen
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Guozhang,
> >
> > LGTM, +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 5:07 PM Guozha
+1 (non-binding), thanks Guozhang
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 1:14 AM Boyang Chen wrote:
>
> Hey Guozhang,
>
> LGTM, +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 5:07 PM Guozhang Wang wrote:
>
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I've created a new KIP allowing consumer.committed to take a set of
> > partitions
Hey Guozhang,
LGTM, +1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 5:07 PM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> I've created a new KIP allowing consumer.committed to take a set of
> partitions instead of just one partition to allow batching effects of such
> requests (the protocol already allows us
Hello folks,
I've created a new KIP allowing consumer.committed to take a set of
partitions instead of just one partition to allow batching effects of such
requests (the protocol already allows us to send multiple partitions in one
round-trip):
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KI
16 matches
Mail list logo
