Hi Sean, You're absolutely right. Thanks for summarizing it so clearly!
That's also the reason I renamed the config ----the original name could indeed be misleading. Best, Lan At 2025-08-22 01:42:09, "Sean Quah" <sq...@confluent.io.INVALID> wrote: >Hi Lan, >Thanks for your response. I misunderstood the purpose of the proposed >`max.buffer.size` configs earlier. I thought we were going to reject >messages larger than the `max.buffer.size`, but that's not the case. The >new configs only control the buffer caching behavior and we will continue >to allow writes up to `max.message.bytes`. ie. we can temporarily have a >buffer larger than `max.buffer.size` but it won't be held for reuse. Please >correct me if my understanding is still wrong. > >Thanks, >Sean > >On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 5:38 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@apache.org> wrote: > >> hi Lan >> >> chia_03: >> >> Since the hard limit between `message.max.bytes` and this new config was >> removed, is it still necessary to make `max.buffer.size` dynamic? Users >> won’t encounter errors when decreasing `message.max.bytes` anymore. >> >> Best, >> Chia-Ping >> >> On 2025/08/17 16:37:40 Lan Ding wrote: >> > Hello everyone, I'd like to discuss a KIP regarding introducing a new >> configuration, >> > group.coordinator.append.max.bytes Thank you! KIP link: >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/hA5JFg Best, Lan Ding >>
