I could see a situation where you pass a status to Kafka for a specific
Consumer Group. That status could be resetLatest or resetEarliest and Kafka
handles the signal similar to a rebalance but sets the offset based on the
earliest/latest. I think anything more, like passing a map of partitions
and offsets, could over complicate things.

-- Andrew

On Tue, Nov 11, 2025, 6:59 AM Levani Kokhreidze <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I'd like to get some feedback from the community on the following idea.
>
> Currently, to safely perform a consumer group offset reset, the consumer
> group must be inactive. In practice, for a production service, this means
> the entire service must be stopped to perform the reset. Depending on the
> service's criticality, this isn't always possible.
>
> The alternative is to build custom tooling for our Kafka clients that
> allows them to be shut down on request. However, developing this
> client-side tooling is expensive, and that cost multiplies when you need to
> support multiple programming languages.
>
> I understand why resetting offsets on an active consumer group is
> problematic. This leads me to wonder: what is the community's opinion on
> developing more advanced broker-side management for the consumer groups?
>
> In short, what if we could use the AdminClient to mark a specific consumer
> group as "inactive"? This state would then enable us to perform an offset
> reset safely, without ever needing to make changes or take actions on the
> client side.
>
> I appreciate that "marking a consumer group as inactive" is an abstract
> term, and there are many nuances and details to think through. At this
> point, I'm just looking for super-early feedback from more experienced
> Kafka developers on whether this general idea makes sense.
>
> If it does, my team and I would be very interested in helping to deliver
> this feature. We can start working on a KIP to share with the community. We
> would also appreciate any early pointers on how to approach this if you
> think it's a viable idea.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Levani

Reply via email to