Hi Andrew, As proposed, I don't think there's a straightforward way to log warnings that won't require knowledge of the broker's enforcement status. Ultimately, the cluster administrators have the option of setting resource.identifier.limit.enable back to false in a "break glass" situation.
Thanks, Kirk On Tue, Nov 4, 2025, at 2:02 AM, Andrew Schofield wrote: > Hi Kirk, > Thanks for reviewing the KIP. > > KT1: I suppose one way would be to issue a warning log in the client if the > user attempts to use identifiers longer than the KIP recommends. We could > even make it conditional on the version of the requests being built so that > the “proper” exception is thrown instead if the broker supports the bumped > versions of the APIs which support the new error code. I don’t think we > should pander too much to these people. Wdyt? > > Thanks, > Andrew > > > On 4 Nov 2025, at 01:36, Kirk True <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > Thanks for the KIP. I like the idea of standardizing the resource ID > > lengths and largely agree that—to paraphrase an apocryphal quote—no one > > will ever need more than 249 characters. > > > > KT1: My understanding is that the client will be ignorant of the limits, up > > until the point the server returns the "RESOURCE_IDENTIFIER_TOO_LARGE" > > error. I worry that for (the small number of) users whose IDs violate these > > limits, their applications will work one day, and then unexpectedly break > > the next. Ideally there would be a grace period in which to warn users that > > they're over the limits so they can make changes before the limits are > > enforced. Warning logs could be added on the broker side, but that > > information may not make it to an organization's individual applications > > because it's not always easy to correlate the warnings to a particular > > application. > > > > Thanks, > > Kirk > > > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2025, at 4:22 AM, Andrew Schofield wrote: > >> Hi, > >> I’d like to start discussion on KIP-1233: Maximum lengths for resource > >> names and IDs. > >> > >> Today, Kafka applies a limit of 249 characters for topic names, but other > >> identifiers such > >> as group IDs do not have limits. The KIP proposes introducing limits for > >> all resource > >> names and identifiers in Apache Kafka 5.0. The proposed limits are > >> intended to be large > >> enough that nobody is impacted. > >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1233%3A+Maximum+lengths+for+resource+names+and+IDs > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Andrew > >> > >
