Hello Andrew, Jiunn_00: The kafka-cluster.sh script also has the --config argument. Should we align this with --command-config for consistency?
Best Regards, Jiunn-Yang > Andrew Schofield <andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> 於 2025年8月13日 晚上11:06 寫道： > > Hi Chia-Ping, > It's come to my attention that I completely missed a set of comments from you > on this KIP. Please accept my apologies. > >>> chia_00: Should we introduce `--consumer-property` to >>> `kafka-consumer-perf-test.sh` and >>> `kafka-share-consumer-perf-test.sh` since another perf tool, >>> `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh`, has `--producer-property`? > > Yes, good idea. Added to the KIP. > >>> chia_01: should we align the naming of "how many records"? >>> `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh` uses `num-records`, >>> while `kafka-consumer-perf-test.sh` and `kafka-share-consumer-perf-test.sh` >>> use `messages`. > > I think this is a sensible alignment. My view is that we generally use > "record" in Kafka, so I suggest > deprecating `messages` in the two consumer tools and replacing with > `num-records`. > >>> chia_02: Have you considering adding `reporting-interval` to >>> `kafka-producer-perf-test.sh`? > > I had not but this is quite a straightforward thing to do. It has a reporting > interval but just lacks > the ability to configure it. I've added it to the KIP. > > > Thanks, > Andrew > ________________________________________ > From: Federico Valeri <fedeval...@gmail.com> > Sent: 17 July 2025 09:50 > To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line arguments > > Hi Andrew, thanks for this useful KIP. > > This is something that I also though while working on tools migration > from Scala to Java, but that wasn't the right time. > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 6:18 PM Andrew Schofield > <andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Kirk, >> Thanks for your email. >> >> KT01: During the migration period, using both --producer-props and >> --producer-property >> is an error. If they use --producer-props, it works and they get a >> deprecation warning. >> If they use --producer-property, it works with no warning. I have updated >> the KIP >> accordingly. >> >> I don't really like --command-config either, but I don't think it's >> ambiguous as such. It's >> just a bit generic to my way of thinking. >> >> Thanks, >> Andrew >> ________________________________________ >> From: Kirk True <k...@kirktrue.pro> >> Sent: 10 July 2025 02:06 >> To: dev@kafka.apache.org <dev@kafka.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-1147: Improve consistency of command-line >> arguments >> >> Hi Andrew, >> >> Thanks for the KIP. Yes, the inconsistency drives me crazy :) >> >> Just one initial question: >> >> KT01: During the migration period where both command line arguments are >> supported (e.g. --producer-props and --producer-property), which takes >> precedence? >> >> I'm not ecstatic about the existing naming of "--command-config" because >> it's ambiguous, but that's a battle for another day... >> >> Thanks, >> Kirk >> >> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025, at 6:53 AM, Andrew Schofield wrote: >>> Hi, >>> I'd like to start discussion of KIP-1147. This KIP aligns the names of the >>> command-line >>> arguments across all of the Apache Kafka command-line tools. >>> >>> KIP: >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1147%3A+Improve+consistency+of+command-line+arguments >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Andrew
