[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3445?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15210382#comment-15210382 ]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on KAFKA-3445: --------------------------------------- GitHub user rnpridgeon opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/1132 KAFKA-3445 Currently the property TASKS_MAX_CONFIG is not validated against nonsensical values such as 0. This patch leverages the Range.atLeast() method to ensure value is at least 1. You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/rnpridgeon/kafka KAFKA-3445 Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/1132.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #1132 ---- commit 8617218300d5af70a4dc62ac4de77f443291b5ed Author: Ryan P <ryan.n.pridg...@gmail.com> Date: 2016-03-24T14:56:11Z KAFKA-3445 add validator to TASKS_MAX_CONFIG ---- > ConnectorConfig should validate TASKS_MAX_CONFIG's lower bound limit > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: KAFKA-3445 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3445 > Project: Kafka > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: config > Reporter: Ryan P > Priority: Trivial > Labels: newbie > Attachments: KAFKA-3445.patch > > > I'll be the first to admit this is a bit nit picky any property marked with > Importance.HIGH should be guarded against nonsensical values. > With that said I would like to suggest that TASKS_MAX_CONFIG be validating > against a lower bound limit of 1. > I do understand this is unlikely to happen and the configuration is > nonsensical but there is no penalty for stopping someone from trying it out. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)