On Tue, Aug 11, 2020, at 11:30, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding). A couple of comments:
>
> 1. We have "quorum.voters=1@kafka-1:9092, 2@kafka-2:9092,
> 3@kafka-3:9092". Could
> this be a bit confusing given that the authority part of a url is defined
> as "authority = [userinf
Thanks everyone for the votes. I am going to close this with +5 binding
(me, Colin, Boyang, Jun, and Ismael) and none against.
@Jun Yes, I think it makes sense to expose the usual request metrics for
the new APIs.
Best,
Jason
On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 11:30 AM Ismael Juma wrote:
> Thanks for t
Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding). A couple of comments:
1. We have "quorum.voters=1@kafka-1:9092, 2@kafka-2:9092,
3@kafka-3:9092". Could
this be a bit confusing given that the authority part of a url is defined
as "authority = [userinfo@]host[:port]"?
2. With regards to the Quorum State file, do w
Hi, Jason,
Thanks for the KIP. +1
Just to confirm. For those newly added request types, will we expose the
existing latency metrics (total, local, remote, etc) with a new tag
request=[request-type]?
Jun
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:00 PM Boyang Chen
wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP Jason, +1 (binding)
Thanks for the KIP Jason, +1 (binding) from me as well for sure :)
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 2:46 PM Colin McCabe wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, at 20:55, Jason Gustafson wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > Thanks for the responses.
> >
> > > I have a few lingering questions. I still don't like the fact
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, at 20:55, Jason Gustafson wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks for the responses.
>
> > I have a few lingering questions. I still don't like the fact that the
> > leader epoch / fetch epoch is 31 bits. What happens when this rolls over?
> > Can we just make this 63 bits now so tha
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the responses.
> I have a few lingering questions. I still don't like the fact that the
leader epoch / fetch epoch is 31 bits. What happens when this rolls over?
Can we just make this 63 bits now so that we never have to worry about it
again? ZK has some awful bugs surroun
+1.
Thanks for the detailed KIP!
On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jason Gustafson wrote:
>
> Hi All, I'd like to start a vote on this proposal:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-595%3A+A+Raft+Protocol+for+the+Metadata+Quorum.
> The discussion has been active for a bit more t
Hi Jason,
The KIP looks great. Thanks for all the work you've put into this.
I have a few lingering questions. I still don't like the fact that the leader
epoch / fetch epoch is 31 bits. What happens when this rolls over? Can we
just make this 63 bits now so that we never have to worry abou
+1
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 19:03, Jason Gustafson wrote:
> Hi All, I'd like to start a vote on this proposal:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-595%3A+A+Raft+Protocol+for+the+Metadata+Quorum
> .
> The discussion has been active for a bit more than 3 months and I think the
>
Hi All, I'd like to start a vote on this proposal:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-595%3A+A+Raft+Protocol+for+the+Metadata+Quorum.
The discussion has been active for a bit more than 3 months and I think the
main points have been addressed. We have also moved some of the pieces
11 matches
Mail list logo
