Hi Everyone, There remains some inconsistency in the timeout behavior of the consumer APIs which do not accept a timeout. Some of them block forever (e.g. position()) and some of them use request.timeout.ms (e.g. parititonsFor()). I think we'd probably all agree that blocking forever is not useful behavior and using request.timeout.ms has always been a hack since it controls a separate concern. I think there are basically two options to address this:
1. We can add max.block.ms to match the producer and use it as the default timeout when a timeout is not explicitly provided. This will fix the indefinite blocking behavior and avoid conflating request.timeout.ms. 2. We can deprecate the methods which don't accept a timeout. I'm leaning toward the first solution because I think we want to push users to specifying timeouts through configuration rather than in code (Jay's original argument). I think the overloads are still useful for advanced usage (e.g. in kafka streams), but we should give users an easy option with reasonable default behavior. If that sounds ok, I'd propose we add it to this KIP and fix it now. This gives users an easy way to get the benefit of the improvements from this KIP without changing any code. Thanks, Jason On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 7:58 PM, Richard Yu <yohan.richard...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > With 3 binding votes and 6 non-binding, this KIP would be accepted. > > Thanks for participating. > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 2:35 AM, Edoardo Comar <edoco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 10:29, zhenya Sun <toke...@126.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 non-binding > > > > > > > 在 2018年5月10日，下午5:19，Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com> 写道： > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding). > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Mickael Maison < > > > mickael.mai...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> +1 (non binding) > > > >> Thanks > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Rajini Sivaram < > > > rajinisiva...@gmail.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >>> Hi Richard, Thanks for the KIP. > > > >>> > > > >>> +1 (binding) > > > >>> > > > >>> Regards, > > > >>> > > > >>> Rajini > > > >>> > > > >>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:54 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> +1 from me, thanks! > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Guozhang > > > >>>> > > > >>>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Jason Gustafson < > > ja...@confluent.io> > > > >>>> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding). > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> One small correction: the KIP mentions that close() will be > > > >> deprecated, > > > >>>> but > > > >>>>> we do not want to do this because it is needed by the Closeable > > > >>>> interface. > > > >>>>> We only want to deprecate close(long, TimeUnit) in favor of > > > >>>>> close(Duration). > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> -Jason > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 12:43 AM, khaireddine Rezgui < > > > >>>>> khaireddine...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> +1 > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> 2018-05-07 20:35 GMT+01:00 Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com>: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> +1 > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> Thanks, > > > >>>>>>> Bill > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Richard Yu < > > > >>>> yohan.richard...@gmail.com > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> Hi all, I would like to bump this thread since discussion in > the > > > >>>> KIP > > > >>>>>>>> appears to be reaching its conclusion. > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Richard Yu < > > > >>>>>> yohan.richard...@gmail.com> > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi all, > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Since there does not seem to be too much discussion in > > > >> KIP-266, I > > > >>>>>> will > > > >>>>>>> be > > > >>>>>>>>> starting a voting thread. > > > >>>>>>>>> Here is the link to KIP-266 for reference: > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage. > > > >>>>>>>> action?pageId=75974886 > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Recently, I have made some updates to the KIP. To reiterate, > I > > > >>>> have > > > >>>>>>>>> included KafkaConsumer's commitSync, > > > >>>>>>>>> poll, and committed in the KIP. (we will be adding to a > > > >>>>>>> TimeoutException > > > >>>>>>>>> to them as well, in a similar manner > > > >>>>>>>>> to what we will be doing for position()) > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > >>>>>>>>> Richard Yu > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>> Ingénieur en informatique > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -- > > > >>>> -- Guozhang > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the > > government fears the people, there is liberty." [Thomas Jefferson] > > >
