Hi Kuan-Po, Thanks for the KIP.
PoAn_01: both num.partitions and default.replication.factor have sentence “For explicit topic creation and internal streams topic creation, this configuration is applied on the controller side.”. Do you want to mean “implicit” here? Thanks, PoAn > On Oct 23, 2025, at 9:34 AM, Kuan Po Tseng <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > If there are no further comments, I plan to start the vote tomorrow. > > Best, > Kuan-Po Tseng > > On 2025/10/15 15:57:04 Kuan Po Tseng wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Sorry for the late reply, and thanks so much for all the feedback — really >> appreciated! >> >> chia_00: Good point. We can add warnings during broker startup to notify >> users about this change. >> chia_01: Thanks for the reminder — as you mentioned, both configs should >> indeed be set to -1. >> >> Luke_01: Absolutely, we can make this change in 5.0. >> Luke_02: Thanks! Agreed, we should update the documentation, as it’s not >> very clear at the moment. >> Luke_03: As you and Ismael suggested, for the 4.x series we can introduce an >> override rule: if users explicitly set these two configs in the broker >> configuration, we’ll continue applying them for auto topic creation. This >> override will eventually be removed in 5.0. I’ve updated the KIP to reflect >> this. >> >> Best, >> Kuan-Po Tseng >> >> On 2025/09/25 13:37:41 Ismael Juma wrote: >>> An alternative would be to allow the configs to be set on either >>> broker.properties or controller.properties. The former would take >>> precedence over the latter (just like topic configs provided by clients >>> take precedence over the default server configuration). >>> >>> Ismael >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 12:01 AM Luke Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Kuan-Po, >>>> >>>> Thanks for fixing this inconsistency! >>>> >>>> Questions: >>>> 1. The `num.partitions` currently still exists in our example >>>> broker.properties file. We should update it, too. >>>> >>>> 2. "This is a breaking change because it alters where these two configs are >>>> applied. The change can only be introduced in the next major release (i.e., >>>> 5.0)." >>>> Does that mean we don't do anything before v5.0? Maybe we can update the >>>> doc first to mention this inconsistency? >>>> >>>> 3. What about the topic configuration overridden in broker and controller >>>> properties file? >>>> For example: >>>> Broker sets "log.retention.ms=100" >>>> Controller sets "log.retention.ms=1000" >>>> A topic "t" created without setting the "retention.ms". >>>> In this case, the "retention.ms" for topic "t" is 100 or 1000? >>>> Does the inconsistency happen in all topic configs? >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you. >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 1:40 AM Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi Kuan-Po >>>>> >>>>> thanks for this KIP. >>>>> >>>>> chia_00: Is it possible to add warning messages to broker to highlight >>>> this >>>>> change? >>>>> >>>>> chia_01: Should broker set `-1` explicitly? >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Chia-Ping >>>>> >>>>> Kuan-Po Tseng <[email protected]> 於 2025年9月25日 週四 上午12:20寫道： >>>>> >>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> I’d like to bring up a small change aimed at aligning the behavior of >>>>>> num.partitions and default.replication.factor during topic creation. >>>>>> >>>>>> You can find the KIP here: >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/WIrHFg. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Kuan-Po Tseng >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
