ssage-
From: Divij Vaidya
Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2023 2:33 PM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-942: Add Power(ppc64le) support
Hey Vaibhav
1. KIP says "Enable CI for power architecture and run tests with Java 8, 11 and
17 and Scala 2.13". Do different
Hey Vaibhav
1. KIP says "Enable CI for power architecture and run tests with Java
8, 11 and 17 and Scala 2.13". Do different versions of JVM work
differently for power architecture? Would it be sufficient if we just
run it with the latest supported JDK (20) + latest supported scala
(2.13) ?
2. Ca
son
> Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2023 3:12 PM
> To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-942: Add Power(ppc64le) support
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the KIP!
> In the Test Plan section you mentioned a few unit and integration tests are
> failing. Are these flaky t
4&s=J35xYPMn5tCJRn91aARKgyiwas_cu4RGeSsh50tV4GI&e=
> > has already enabled CI for power platform they are using same H/W
> > resources as
> > RAM- 16GB
> > VCPUs- 8 VCPU
> > Disk- 160GB
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > F
t; > Disk- 160GB
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Divij Vaidya
> > Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 10:20 PM
> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-942: Add Power(ppc64le) support
> >
> > Thank you for the
resources as
> RAM- 16GB
> VCPUs- 8 VCPU
> Disk- 160GB
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Divij Vaidya
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2023 10:20 PM
> To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-942: Add Power(ppc64le) support
>
> Thank you f
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-942: Add Power(ppc64le) support
Thank you for the KIP Vaibhav.
1. Builds for power architecture were intentionally disabled in the past since
the infrastructure was flaky [1]. Could you please add to the KIP on what has
changed since then?
2. What do you
Thank you for the KIP Vaibhav.
1. Builds for power architecture were intentionally disabled in the past
since the infrastructure was flaky [1]. Could you please add to the KIP on
what has changed since then?
2. What do you think about an alternative solution where we run a nightly
build for this p
