vote next week if nobody has any additional input or concerns.
Thanks and best regards,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Welch, Matt
Sent: Monday, August 5, 2024 2:54 PM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-1052: Enable warmup in producer performance test
Hi all,
After muc
e feedback on that point would be helpful.
Thanks,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Welch, Matt
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2024 1:38 PM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-1052: Enable warmup in producer performance test
Hi Federico,
Thanks for your response. I have a
be helpful.
Thanks,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Welch, Matt
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2024 1:38 PM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-1052: Enable warmup in producer performance test
Hi Federico,
Thanks for your response. I have a few questions.
> You mean, no exis
has a better description and help output example. The intent for
> > these options is definitely to avoid any breakage of existing producer
> > performance system tests. I've also revised some of the language used for
> > better clarity.
> >
> > 2. I
dated the command
lines to contain the payload-file option.
Thanks,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Federico Valeri
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 1:04 AM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1052: Enable warmup in producer performance test
Hi Matt, thanks for the updates. Snippets ar
m steady state results, it could be tempting for
> > > users to run very short tests since they no longer need to wait long
> > > to achieve a repeatable steady-state result. I would consider this a
> > > case of insufficient warmup since Kafka could still be processing
>
at feature
and should be described in a future KIP.
Thanks,
Matt
-----Original Message-
From: Federico Valeri
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2024 8:02 AM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1052: Enable warmup in producer performance test
Hi Matt, I thanks for the KIP, this is a really
first test, then double
> > that duration for the warmup in subsequent testing. One minute is usually
> > sufficient. A problem does occur when using unlimited throughput since the
> > user does not yet know how fast the producers will send so can't estimate
> &
sufficient. A problem does occur when using unlimited throughput since the
> user does not yet know how fast the producers will send so can't estimate
> warmup records. If the iterative testing described above is not possible to
> estimate a warmup, the user must choose a fairly large n
d so can't estimate
warmup records. If the iterative testing described above is not possible to
estimate a warmup, the user must choose a fairly large number of records for
the warmup.
Best Regards,
Matt Welch
-Original Message-
From: Divij Vaidya
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 202
Thank you for the KIP, Matt.
Totally agree on having a warm-up for benchmark testing. The initial
producer setup time could involve things such as network connection setup
(including authN, SSL handshake etc), DNS resolution, metadata fetching etc
which could impact the result of steady-state perf
Hi Matt,
Yes I forgot to update the KIP counter after creating a KIP. I changed mine
to 1053. We should be all good now.
Cheers,
Eric
On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 3:08 PM Welch, Matt wrote:
> Hello again Kafka devs,
>
> I'd like to again call attention to this KIP for discussion.
> Apparently, we e
Hello again Kafka devs,
I'd like to again call attention to this KIP for discussion.
Apparently, we encountered a race condition when choosing KIP numbers, but
hopefully it's straightened out now.
Regards,
Matt
-Original Message-
From: Welch, Matt
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2024 4:44 P
13 matches
Mail list logo
