Hi Dong
Thanks for the questions:
1. Now we don't distinguish inactive or active groups. Because in some case
maybe inactive group will become active again, and using the previous commit
offset.
So we will not delete the log segment in the consumer retention if there are
some groups consume but not commit, but the log segment can be delete by
the force retention.
2. These configs are used to determine the out of date time of the consumed
retention, like the parameters of the force retention (log.retention.hours,
log.retention.minutes, log.retention.ms). For example, users want the save the
log for 3 days, after 3 days, kafka will delete the log segments which are
consumed by all the consumer group. The log retention thread need these
parameters.
Thanks,
David
> Hey David,
>
> Thanks for the KIP. Can you help with the following two questions:
>
> 1) If someone start a consumer (e.g. kafka-console-consumer) to consume a
> topic for debug/validation purpose, a randome consumer group may be created
> and offset may be committed for this consumer group. If no offset commit is
> made for this consumer group in the future, will this effectively
> disable consumed log retention for this topic? In other words, how do this
> KIP distinguish active consumer group from inactive ones?
>
> 2) Why do we need new configs such as log.retention.commitoffset.hours? Can
>we simply delete log segments if consumed log retention is enabled for this
> topic and all consumer groups have consumed messages in the log segment?
>
> Thanks,
> Dong
>
>
>
>On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Pengwei (L) <pengwei...@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Becket,
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback:
> > 1. We use the simple consumer api to query the commit offset, so we don't
> > need to specify the consumer group.
> > 2. Every broker using the simple consumer api(OffsetFetchKey) to query
> > the commit offset in the log retention process. The client can commit
> > offset or not.
> > 3. It does not need to distinguish the follower brokers or leader
> > brokers, every brokers can query.
> > 4. We don't need to change the protocols, we mainly change the log
> > retention process in the log manager.
> >
> > One question is the query min offset need O(partitions * groups) time
> > complexity, another alternative is to build an internal topic to save every
> > partition's min offset, it can reduce to O(1).
> > I will update the wiki for more details.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
> >
> >
> > > Hi Pengwei,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the KIP proposal. It is a very useful KIP. At a high level,
> > the
> > > proposed behavior looks reasonable to me.
> > >
> > > However, it seems that some of the details are not mentioned in the KIP.
> > > For example,
> > >
> > > 1. How will the expected consumer group be specified? Is it through a per
> > > topic dynamic configuration?
> > > 2. How do the brokers detect the consumer offsets? Is it required for a
> > > consumer to commit offsets?
> > > 3. How do all the replicas know the about the committed offsets? e.g. 1)
> > > non-coordinator brokers which do not have the committed offsets, 2)
> > > follower brokers which do not have consumers directly consuming from it.
> > > 4. Is there any other changes need to be made (e.g. new protocols) in
> > > addition to the configuration change?
> > >
> > > It would be great if you can update the wiki to have more details.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:26 AM, Pengwei (L) <pengwei...@huawei.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >I have made a KIP to enhance the log retention, details as follows:
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > > 68+Add+a+consumed+log+retention+before+log+retention
> > > >Now start a discuss thread for this KIP , looking forward to the
> > > > feedback.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > David
> > > >
> > > >
