Re: [DISCUSS] Cluster Linking / Cross-Cluster Replication - Call for Interest & Co-Authors

Hi Greg, This sounds very interesting and I think it is a very valuable feature. I'd like to volunteer in any way I can be useful and am more than happy to help with co authoring KIPs and implementation. Thanks Tom On Fri, 19 May 2023, 23:15 Colt McNealy, wrote: > I'm highly intereste

[DISCUSS] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids

Hi, I'm starting this thread to discuss KIP-709 to extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids. Please check out the KIP here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=173084258 Any comments much appreciated. thanks, Tom

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids

broker that cannot handle these requests then the methods will throw > > UnsupportedVersionException as per the usual pattern. > > > Did we consider automatically falling back to the single group id request > if the more efficient one is not supported? > > Ismael > &

[VOTE] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids.

Hey all, I'd like to start the vote for https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=173084258 Thanks Tom

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-709: Full support for distributed mode in dedicated MirrorMaker 2.0 clusters

Hi Daniel, It seems we have duplicate KIP-709s. Can we move this one to KIP-710? Thanks Tom On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 8:35 AM Dániel Urbán wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I would like to start a discussion on KIP-709, which addresses some missing > features in MM2 dedicated mode. > > Currentl

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids

> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:13 AM Rajini Sivaram > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, this is a useful addition for admin use cases. It > may > > > be worth starting the voting thread soon if we want to get this i

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids

Thanks David I've updated it. On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 1:55 PM David Jacot wrote: > Great. That answers my question! > > Thomas, I suggest adding a Related/Future Work section in the > KIP to link KIP-699 more explicitly. > > Thanks, > David > > On Tue, Jan

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-709: Extend OffsetFetch requests to accept multiple group ids

p-level to the > Group array, which makes sense, > but it would be good if it was marked as // MOVED in the KIP and also a > note that top level errors that > are unrelated to the group will be returned as per-group errors. > > > Regards, > Magnus > > > Den tis 26 jan

[DISCUSS] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

Hey all, I'd like to open up the discussion on a KIP-734. This adds a new OffsetSpec to AdminClient.listOffsets so that we can easily determine the offset and timestamp of the message with the largest timestamp on a partition. Please give it a look over and let me know what you think. https:

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

Hey all, Just a quick prod for reviews on this. I'm looking to open a vote on Thursday if there are no objections. Thanks Tom > > Hey all, > > I'd like to open up the discussion on a KIP-734. This adds a new > OffsetSpec to AdminClient.listOffsets so that we can easily determine the > of

[VOTE] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

Hey all, I'm starting the voting on KIP-734. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-734%3A+Improve+AdminClient.listOffsets+to+return+timestamp+and+offset+for+the+record+with+the+largest+timestamp Thanks Tom

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

e moment, it only explains what will be added. > > > > 2. You plan to add the `MAX_TIMESTAMP` constant to tell the > > broker to return the maximum timestamp. How do you plan to > > handle the case where a new admin client would send this to > > an old broker w

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

mp type in the response but it is not > strictly necessary as > you pointed out as one knows what it queries for. I don't have a strong > opinion > about this. > > Best, > David > > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 3:52 PM Thomas Scott > wrote: > > > Hi Da

Re: [VOTE] KIP-734: Improve AdminClient.listOffsets to return timestamp and offset for the record with the largest timestamp

ing) > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, Tom. > > > > > > Best, > > > David > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 12:42 PM Thomas Scott > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hey all, > > > > > > >