Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2021-01-11 Thread Colin McCabe
After thinking about this more, I have decided to just use an unsigned 16-bit int for ports. Using 4 bytes would be wasteful here. So I set these fields to uint16. This is straightforward to support in the wire protocol and will be more efficient going forward. I updated the KIP. best, Coli

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2021-01-05 Thread Colin McCabe
Hi all, Addendum: some of the port types in this KIP were specified as int16 in the wire protocol. But this does not gracefully handle ports like 33,000, which shows up as negative when using a signed 16 bit number. I think eventually we'll want a uint16 type, but for now I just made them int

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-21 Thread Colin McCabe
Hi all, With non-binding +1 votes from Ron Dagostino, Tom Bentley and Unmesh Joshi, and binding +1 votes from David Arthur, Boyang Chen, Jason Gusafson, Ismael Juma, David Jacot, Jun Rao, the KIP passes. thanks, all! cheers, Colin On Fri, Dec 18, 2020, at 12:42, Colin McCabe wrote: > Hi all,

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-18 Thread Colin McCabe
Hi all, I'm going to close the vote in a few hours. Thanks to everyone who reviewed and voted. best, Colin On Fri, Dec 18, 2020, at 10:08, Jun Rao wrote: > Thanks, Colin. +1 > > Jun > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:24 AM David Jacot wrote: > > > Thanks for driving this KIP, Colin. The KIP is

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-18 Thread Jun Rao
Thanks, Colin. +1 Jun On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:24 AM David Jacot wrote: > Thanks for driving this KIP, Colin. The KIP is really well written. This is > so exciting! > > +1 (binding) > > Best, > David > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:51 PM Colin McCabe wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 13:08

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-17 Thread David Jacot
Thanks for driving this KIP, Colin. The KIP is really well written. This is so exciting! +1 (binding) Best, David On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:51 PM Colin McCabe wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 13:08, Ismael Juma wrote: > > Thanks for all the work on the KIP. Given the magnitude of the KIP, I

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Colin McCabe
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 13:08, Ismael Juma wrote: > Thanks for all the work on the KIP. Given the magnitude of the KIP, I > expect that some tweaks will be made as the code is implemented, reviewed > and tested. I'm overall +1 (binding). > Thanks, Ismael. > A few comments below: > 1. It's a bit

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Ismael Juma
Thanks for all the work on the KIP. Given the magnitude of the KIP, I expect that some tweaks will be made as the code is implemented, reviewed and tested. I'm overall +1 (binding). A few comments below: 1. It's a bit weird for kafka-storage to output a random uuid. Would it be better to have a de

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Colin McCabe
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, at 10:10, Jason Gustafson wrote: > +1 Thanks Colin for all the iterations. My only request is to change > "controller.connect" to "controller.quorum.voters." I think it's important > to emphasize that this must be the full set of voters unlike > "zookeeper.connect." In the fut

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Jason Gustafson
+1 Thanks Colin for all the iterations. My only request is to change "controller.connect" to "controller.quorum.voters." I think it's important to emphasize that this must be the full set of voters unlike "zookeeper.connect." In the future, I think we can consider supporting an additional config li

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Unmesh Joshi
Went through the changes since the last discussion thread, and it's looking in good shape. Thanks!. + 1 (non-binding) On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 4:34 PM Tom Bentley wrote: > Thanks for the KIP Colin, it does a great job of clearly explaining some > pretty complex changes. > > +1 (non-binding) > > T

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-16 Thread Tom Bentley
Thanks for the KIP Colin, it does a great job of clearly explaining some pretty complex changes. +1 (non-binding) Tom On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 7:13 PM Boyang Chen wrote: > Thanks Colin for the great work to polish the KIP and reach this final > stage. +1 (binding) from me > > On Tue, Dec 15,

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-15 Thread Boyang Chen
Thanks Colin for the great work to polish the KIP and reach this final stage. +1 (binding) from me On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 9:11 AM David Arthur wrote: > Colin, thanks for driving this. I just read through the KIP again and I > think it is in good shape. Exciting stuff! > > +1 binding > > -David

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-15 Thread David Arthur
Colin, thanks for driving this. I just read through the KIP again and I think it is in good shape. Exciting stuff! +1 binding -David On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 7:46 AM Ron Dagostino wrote: > Thanks for shepherding this KIP through the extended discussion, Colin. I > think we’ve ended up in a goo

Re: [VOTE] voting on KIP-631: the quorum-based Kafka controller

2020-12-12 Thread Ron Dagostino
Thanks for shepherding this KIP through the extended discussion, Colin. I think we’ve ended up in a good place. I’m sure there will be more tweaks along the way, but the fundamentals are in place. +1 (non-binding) from me. Ron > On Dec 11, 2020, at 4:39 PM, Colin McCabe wrote: > > Hi all,