Hey Gokul, thanks for taking up this KIP! I agree with Matthias that directly extending KafkaException may not be ideal, and we should instead extend APIException or RetriableException. Of the two, I think APIException would be more appropriate. My understanding is that RetriableException is generally reserved for internally retriable exceptions whereas APIException is used for pseudo-fatal exceptions that require some user input as to how to proceed (eg ProducerFencedException)
I also agree that the name could be a bit more concise. My personal vote would be for "TransactionAbortedException" which seems a bit more grammatically aligned with the other exceptions in Kafka. Cheers, Sophie On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 6:01 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > Thanks for the KIP. Looks good overall. > > However, I am wondering if the new exception should extend > `KafkaException`? It seems, extending `ApiException` or maybe even > `RetriableException` might be better? > > About the name itself. I would prefer something simpler like > `AbortedTransactionException`. > > Thoughts? > > > -Matthias > > > On 8/27/20 10:24 AM, Gokul Srinivas wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > I would like to propose the following KIP to throw a new non-fatal > > exception whilst aborting transactions with non-flushed data. This will > > help users distinguish non-fatal errors and potentially retry the batch. > > > > *Issue *- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10186 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10186> > > > > *KIP *- > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-654:+Aborted+transaction+with+non-flushed+data+should+throw+a+non-fatal+exception > > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-654:+Aborted+transaction+with+non-flushed+data+should+throw+a+non-fatal+exception > > > > > > > > Please let me know how best we can proceed with this. > > > > -Gokul > > > > > >
