Hi Tom,

Maybe we can discuss that as part of KIP-179. I don't think we should
introduce a separate interface for the changes suggested here.

Ismael

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Edoardo,
>
> KIP-179 will support changing topic configurations via the AdminClient and
> this would open a loophole to avoid the current CreateTopicPolicy:
>
> 1. Create a topic that sticks to the policy
> 2. Modify the topic after creation to something which would have violated
> the policy.
>
> For this reason KIP-179 proposes to apply the create topic policy to topic
> modification too. If there were going to be a new "V2" interface (as
> opposed to changing the RequestMetadata) I think it would be beneficial if
> the name reflected that it applied to updates too.
> CreateOrAlterTopicPolicy? Though obviously that name doesn't reflect that
> its heritage in the original CreateTopicPolicy.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
>
> On 5 September 2017 at 18:48, Edoardo Comar <edoco...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ismael,
> > I was on leave for a long while. I will update the KIP.
> >
> > Edo
> >
> > On 5 September 2017 at 11:42, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Edoardo,
> > >
> > > Do you intend to update the KIP to avoid the introduction of another
> > > interface?
> > >
> > > Ismael
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 5:47 PM, Edoardo Comar <eco...@uk.ibm.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the thoughts Ismael
> > > >
> > > > > 1. Have you considered extending RequestMetadata with the
> additional
> > > > > information you need? We could add Cluster to it, which has topic
> > > > > assignment information, for example. This way, there would be no
> need
> > > > for a
> > > > > V2 interface.
> > > >
> > > > 1. I hadn't thought of it - but this seems a feasible alternative.
> > > >
> > > > The XXXPolicy.RequestMetadata could be enriched to include more
> > > > information -
> > > > for backward compatibility with existing Policies we would only add
> > > > methods to these classes.
> > > >
> > > > Presumably the number of Admin Request is not huge so we should not
> be
> > > too
> > > > worried
> > > > about the overhead of populating a org.apache.kafka.common.Cluster
> for
> > > > every admin request , right ?
> > > >
> > > > The only feature I can't see how to easily support with the enriched
> > > > XXXPolicy.RequestMetadata is how to check
> > > > for a topic being marked for deletion using the Cluster information
> > > >
> > > > This check is useful for us in excluding such outliers when counting
> > the
> > > > number of partitions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 2. Something else that could be useful is passing an instance of
> > > > `Session`
> > > > > so that one can provide custom behaviour depending on the logged in
> > > > user.
> > > > > Would this be useful?
> > > > 2. Definitely I would expect that a general solution includes the
> > Session
> > > > or the KafkaPrincipal associated with it
> > > > (the latter may be a simpler dependency for the
> > XXXPolicy.RequestMetadata
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 3. For the delete case, we may consider passing a class instead of
> > just
> > > > a
> > > > > string to the validate method so that we have options if we need to
> > > > extend
> > > > > it.
> > > >
> > > > 3. Agree, we should have the DeletePolicy define its RequestMetadata
> > > > class, too
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 4. Do we want to enhance the AlterConfigs policy as well?
> > > >
> > > > 4. I don't see why not :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > > Edo
> > > > --------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Edoardo Comar
> > > >
> > > > IBM Message Hub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > isma...@gmail.com wrote on 22/06/2017 15:05:06:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk>
> > > > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> > > > > Date: 22/06/2017 15:05
> > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-170: Enhanced TopicCreatePolicy and
> > > > > introduction of TopicDeletePolicy
> > > > > Sent by: isma...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the KIP, Edoardo. A few comments:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Ismael
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Edoardo Comar <eco...@uk.ibm.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We've drafted "KIP-170: Enhanced TopicCreatePolicy and
> introduction
> > > of
> > > > > > TopicDeletePolicy" for discussion:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > 170%3A+Enhanced+
> > > > > > TopicCreatePolicy+and+introduction+of+TopicDeletePolicy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please take a look. Your feedback is welcome and much needed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Edoardo
> > > > > > --------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > Edoardo Comar
> > > > > > IBM Message Hub
> > > > > > eco...@uk.ibm.com
> > > > > > IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park, SO21 2JN
> > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> > > > number
> > > > > > 741598.
> > > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> Hampshire
> > > PO6
> > > > 3AU
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> > number
> > > > 741598.
> > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
> PO6
> > > 3AU
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the
> > government fears the people, there is liberty." [Thomas Jefferson]
> >
>

Reply via email to