Thanks for the review Jun. Yes, that's a good point, I have updated the KIP.

Ismael

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote:

> Hi, Ismael,
>
> Thanks for the KIP. Looks reasonable to me. To be consistent with the
> pattern used in other pluggable interfaces, we probably should make the new
> interface configurable and closable?
>
> Jun
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Dan and Colin for the feedback. I updated the KIP to include the
> > addition of a validation mode. Since we need to bump the protocol version
> > for that, I also added an error message per topic to the response. I had
> > the latter as "Future Work", but I actually felt that it should be in the
> > first version (good to have feedback confirming that).
> >
> > Let me know if the changes look good to you.
> >
> > Ismael
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, I agree... having a validation mode would be nice.  We should be
> > > explicit that passing validation doesn't 100% guarantee that a
> > > subsequent call to create the topic will succeed, though.  There is an
> > > obvious race condition there-- for example, with a plugin which
> consults
> > > some external authentication system, there could be a change to the
> > > privileges in between validation and attempted creation.
> > >
> > > It also seems like we should try to provide a helpful exception message
> > > for the cases where topic creation fails.  This might involve adding
> > > more detail about error conditions to CreateTopicsRequest... right now
> > > it just returns an error code, but a text message would be a nice
> > > addition.
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > > Colin
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017, at 13:41, dan wrote:
> > > > it would be nice to have a dry-run or validate ability added to this
> > kip.
> > > > since we are offloading validation to a 3rd party implementor a
> random
> > > > user
> > > > can't know a priori (based solely on kafka configs) whether a call
> > should
> > > > succeed without actually creating the topic.
> > > >
> > > > a similar case is in connect where there is a separate endpoint
> > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/trunk/connect/
> > > runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/connect/runtime/rest/resources/
> > > ConnectorPluginsResource.java#L49-L58>
> > > > to attempt to validate a connect configuration without actually
> > creating
> > > > the connector.
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > > dan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > We've posted "KIP-108: Create Topic Policy" for discussion:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > > > 108%3A+Create+Topic+Policy
> > > > >
> > > > > Please take a look. Your feedback is appreciated.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Ismael
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to