Yes, consider my e-mail an up vote! I guess the files would automatically moved somewhere else to separate the active from cold segments? Ideally, one could run an unmodified consumer application on the cold segments.
--Scott On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Rad Gruchalski <ra...@gruchalski.com> wrote: > Scott, > > This is what I was trying to target in one of my previous responses to > Daniel. The one in which I suggest another compaction setting for kafka. > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > Radek Gruchalski > ra...@gruchalski.com (mailto:ra...@gruchalski.com) (mailto: > ra...@gruchalski.com) > de.linkedin.com/in/radgruchalski/ ( > http://de.linkedin.com/in/radgruchalski/) > > Confidentiality: > This communication is intended for the above-named person and may be > confidential and/or legally privileged. > If it has come to you in error you must take no action based on it, nor > must you copy or show it to anyone; please delete/destroy and inform the > sender immediately. > > > > On Monday, 13 July 2015 at 15:41, Scott Thibault wrote: > > > We've tried to use Kafka not as a persistent store, but as a long-term > > archival store. An outstanding issue we've had with that is that the > > broker holds on to an open file handle on every file in the log! The > other > > issue we've had is when you create a long-term archival log on shared > > storage, you can't simply access that data from another cluster b/c of > meta > > data being stored in zookeeper rather than in the log. > > > > --Scott Thibault > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Daniel Schierbeck < > > daniel.schierb...@gmail.com (mailto:daniel.schierb...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > Would it be possible to document how to configure Kafka to never delete > > > messages in a topic? It took a good while to figure this out, and I > see it > > > as an important use case for Kafka. > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 3:02 PM Daniel Schierbeck < > > > daniel.schierb...@gmail.com (mailto:daniel.schierb...@gmail.com)> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10. jul. 2015, at 23.03, Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io (mailto: > j...@confluent.io)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If I recall correctly, setting log.retention.ms ( > http://log.retention.ms) and > > > log.retention.bytes > > > > to > > > > > -1 disables both. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Daniel Schierbeck < > > > > > daniel.schierb...@gmail.com (mailto:daniel.schierb...@gmail.com)> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10. jul. 2015, at 15.16, Shayne S <shaynest...@gmail.com > (mailto:shaynest...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There are two ways you can configure your topics, log > compaction and > > > > with > > > > > > > no cleaning. The choice depends on your use case. Are the > records > > > > > > > > > > > > uniquely > > > > > > > identifiable and will they receive updates? Then log > compaction is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > way > > > > > > > to go. If they are truly read only, you can go without log > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > compaction. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd rather be free to use the key for partitioning, and the > records > > > are > > > > > > immutable — they're event records — so disabling compaction > altogether > > > > > > would be preferable. How is that accomplished? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have a small processes which consume a topic and perform > upserts > > > to > > > > > > our > > > > > > > various database engines. It's easy to change how it all works > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > consume the single source of truth again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've written a bit about log compaction here: > > > > > http://www.shayne.me/blog/2015/2015-06-25-everything-about-kafka-part-2/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Daniel Schierbeck < > > > > > > > daniel.schierb...@gmail.com (mailto: > daniel.schierb...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to use Kafka as a persistent store – sort of as an > > > > alternative > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > HDFS. The idea is that I'd load the data into various other > systems > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > order to solve specific needs such as full-text search, > analytics, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > indexing > > > > > > > > by various attributes, etc. I'd like to keep a single source > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > truth, > > > > > > > > however. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm struggling a bit to understand how I can configure a > topic to > > > > retain > > > > > > > > messages indefinitely. I want to make sure that my data isn't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > deleted. > > > > > > Is > > > > > > > > there a guide to configuring Kafka like this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > *This e-mail is not encrypted. Due to the unsecured nature of unencrypted > > e-mail, there may be some level of risk that the information in this > e-mail > > could be read by a third party. Accordingly, the recipient(s) named above > > are hereby advised to not communicate protected health information using > > this e-mail address. If you desire to send protected health information > > electronically, please contact MultiScale Health Networks at > (206)538-6090* > > > > > > > -- *This e-mail is not encrypted. Due to the unsecured nature of unencrypted e-mail, there may be some level of risk that the information in this e-mail could be read by a third party. Accordingly, the recipient(s) named above are hereby advised to not communicate protected health information using this e-mail address. If you desire to send protected health information electronically, please contact MultiScale Health Networks at (206)538-6090*
