thanks! it looks good to me
On 2026/04/11 15:18:27 Nick Guo wrote: > Hi Chia-Ping, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > chia_00: Good point :) > > I left share groups out because they don’t go through the `OffsetCommit` path > that this metric is tracking. > > > chia_01: > > That's a great thought. A few things come to mind if we were to head in > that direction: > > (1) To prevent metric drift during group deletions or type changes, we’d > need to track the protocol associated with each materialized offset. This > ensures that we always decrement the correct protocol counter when an > offset is updated or removed. > > (2) For the share protocol, since it doesn't use this offset path, we would > still register the metric for consistency but keep its value at 0. > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2026 at 5:42 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Nick, > > > > Thanks for this KIP. I have a quick question for you > > > > chia_00: Would you mind describing the reason why the share group is not > > included? I don't want to let it feel lonely. > > > > chia_01: Just a thought: is it possible to distinguish the > > 'group-offset-count' by protocol? > > > > Best, > > Chia-Ping > > > > On 2026/04/07 06:55:34 Nick Guo wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion on > > > KIP-1301: Deprecate Yammer-based metrics in `GroupCoordinatorMetrics`. > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/Z5U8G > > > > > > This KIP proposes deprecating the remaining legacy Yammer metrics in ` > > > GroupCoordinatorMetrics` and replacing them with standard Kafka Metrics. > > > This will complete the migration and fully unify the group coordinator's > > > metrics interface. > > > > > > Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Nick > > > > > >
