+1. Thanks for the KIP. On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Joel Koshy <jjkosh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 > > (for the record, I favor the rejected alternative of not awaiting low > watermarks to go past the purge offset. I realize it offers a weaker > guarantee but it is still very useful, easier to implement, slightly > simpler API (no need to return a future) and you can still get access to > the current low watermark via a fetch request; although it would be weird > to include the low watermark on the purge response in this variation) > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Dong Lin <lindon...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > It seems that there is no further concern with the KIP-107. At this point > > we would like to start the voting process. The KIP can be found at > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-107 > > %3A+Add+purgeDataBefore%28%29+API+in+AdminClient. > > > > Thanks, > > Dong > > >
