Re: Dry-run option for new admin commands

Hi Viktor, KIP-179's reassignPartitions() API already has a validateOnly() option. There's no technical barrier to adding similar options to the other state-changing APIs in that KIP, if people think it would be useful. Please comment to say this on the [DISCUSS] thread for the KIP though. In gen

Re: Dry-run option for new admin commands

Yea, I think we have to make a constraint that the dry-run is valid as far as the environment doesn't change. Also I think too that we can dismiss reporting admin operations (like --describe) as they won't be that useful and focus only on those which are altering. (Hope I got your questions right

Re: Dry-run option for new admin commands

State change on broker side may be subject to various factors (network, disk, etc). How would the dry-run report state change which is close to what actually happens in non-dry-run mode ? Thanks On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Viktor Somogyi wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been working on creating a

Dry-run option for new admin commands

Hi all, I've been working on creating a KIP for one of the jiras that aim to refactor the admin commands (KAFKA-3268 -> KAFKA-5722 ) and I see that the KIPs related to these are still under discuss