Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Mickael Maison]

Hi Jun,

Good catch!
The new configuration is indeed compression.zstd.level instead of
compression.snappy.level. I've updated the KIP.

Thanks,
Mickael

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 7:38 PM Jun Rao  wrote:
>
> Hi, Mickael,
>
> Thanks for the updated KIP.
>
> There is a typo. The KIP says that it adds a new option
> compression.snappy.level,
> but later says that Snappy is excluded.
>
> Otherwise, the changes look good to me.
>
> Jun
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 6:40 AM Mickael Maison 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Divij,
> >
> > Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think
> > it supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs
> > would directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios
> > that motivated KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom
> > codec.
> > I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it
> > seems very light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no
> > explanations of error scenarios if clients or brokers don't have
> > compatible codecs), including the motivation which is important when
> > exposing new APIs. On the other hand, KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more
> > details with benchmarks to support the motivation.
> >
> > In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good
> > first step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I
> > believe one of the reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never
> > delivered KIP-390 and nobody was keen on building a KIP on top of
> > another undelivered KIP.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mickael
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey Mickael
> > >
> > > Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the
> > compression
> > > completely pluggable
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka
> > .
> > > If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine
> > grain
> > > compression controls in Kafka?
> > >
> > > It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs which
> > may
> > > satisfy both use cases.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Divij Vaidya
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison  > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> > > > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
> > > > been merged!
> > > >
> > > > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> > > > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> > > > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> > > >
> > > > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> > > > compression..level configurations instead of a single
> > > > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> > > > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> > > > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> > > > section.
> > > >
> > > > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
> > > > have any feedback.
> > > >
> > > > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > > > 1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > > > 2:
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mickael
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > > > >
> > > > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving
> > the
> > > > > compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> > > > > proposed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Dongjin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including
> > the
> > > > > > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Konstantine
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You
> > won't be
> > > > > > > disappointed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As of Present:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyone else?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> 

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Jun Rao]

Hi, Mickael,

Thanks for the updated KIP.

There is a typo. The KIP says that it adds a new option
compression.snappy.level,
but later says that Snappy is excluded.

Otherwise, the changes look good to me.

Jun


On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 6:40 AM Mickael Maison 
wrote:

> Hi Divij,
>
> Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think
> it supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs
> would directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios
> that motivated KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom
> codec.
> I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it
> seems very light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no
> explanations of error scenarios if clients or brokers don't have
> compatible codecs), including the motivation which is important when
> exposing new APIs. On the other hand, KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more
> details with benchmarks to support the motivation.
>
> In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good
> first step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I
> believe one of the reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never
> delivered KIP-390 and nobody was keen on building a KIP on top of
> another undelivered KIP.
>
> Thanks,
> Mickael
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Mickael
> >
> > Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the
> compression
> > completely pluggable
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka
> .
> > If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine
> grain
> > compression controls in Kafka?
> >
> > It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs which
> may
> > satisfy both use cases.
> >
> > --
> > Divij Vaidya
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> > > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
> > > been merged!
> > >
> > > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> > > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> > > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> > >
> > > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> > > compression..level configurations instead of a single
> > > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> > > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> > > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> > > section.
> > >
> > > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
> > > have any feedback.
> > >
> > > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > > 1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > > 2:
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mickael
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > > >
> > > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving
> the
> > > > compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> > > > proposed.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Dongjin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including
> the
> > > > > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Konstantine
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You
> won't be
> > > > > > disappointed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As of Present:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyone else?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tom
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss
> > > thread, I
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could
> > > list
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Tom Bentley]

Hi Mickael,

+1 to getting KIP-390 merged with the per-codec level config.

Thanks,

Tom

On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 at 07:27, Diop, Assane  wrote:
>
> Hi Mickael
> I will take some time today to add some documentation to KIP-984. I actually 
> have a working implementation of the plugin and I have been running test. I 
> would be ready to do a PR anytime.
> As far as motivation, Divij did asked about that and I responded in an email  
> to the mailing list but I will update the KIP -984 accordingly as well.
>
> Assane
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mickael Maison 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 6:40 AM
> To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)
>
> Hi Divij,
>
> Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think it 
> supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs would 
> directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios that motivated 
> KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom codec.
> I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it seems very 
> light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no explanations of error 
> scenarios if clients or brokers don't have compatible codecs), including the 
> motivation which is important when exposing new APIs. On the other hand, 
> KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more details with benchmarks to support the 
> motivation.
>
> In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good first 
> step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I believe one of the 
> reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never delivered KIP-390 and nobody 
> was keen on building a KIP on top of another undelivered KIP.
>
> Thanks,
> Mickael
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya  wrote:
> >
> > Hey Mickael
> >
> > Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the
> > compression completely pluggable
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka.
> > If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine
> > grain compression controls in Kafka?
> >
> > It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs
> > which may satisfy both use cases.
> >
> > --
> > Divij Vaidya
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> > > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still
> > > not been merged!
> > >
> > > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> > > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> > > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> > >
> > > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> > > compression..level configurations instead of a single
> > > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> > > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> > > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> > > section.
> > >
> > > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if
> > > you have any feedback.
> > >
> > > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > > 1:
> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > > 2:
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support
> > > +fine-grained+compression+options
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mickael
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > > >
> > > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by
> > > > moving the compression buffer option into the 'Future Works'
> > > > section, as Ismael proposed.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Dongjin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including
> > > > > the evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > 

RE: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Diop, Assane]

Hi Mickael
I will take some time today to add some documentation to KIP-984. I actually 
have a working implementation of the plugin and I have been running test. I 
would be ready to do a PR anytime.  
As far as motivation, Divij did asked about that and I responded in an email  
to the mailing list but I will update the KIP -984 accordingly as well. 

Assane

-Original Message-
From: Mickael Maison  
Sent: Wednesday, February 7, 2024 6:40 AM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

Hi Divij,

Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think it 
supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs would 
directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios that motivated 
KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom codec.
I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it seems very 
light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no explanations of error 
scenarios if clients or brokers don't have compatible codecs), including the 
motivation which is important when exposing new APIs. On the other hand, 
KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more details with benchmarks to support the 
motivation.

In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good first 
step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I believe one of the 
reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never delivered KIP-390 and nobody 
was keen on building a KIP on top of another undelivered KIP.

Thanks,
Mickael


On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya  wrote:
>
> Hey Mickael
>
> Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the 
> compression completely pluggable 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka.
> If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine 
> grain compression controls in Kafka?
>
> It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs 
> which may satisfy both use cases.
>
> --
> Divij Vaidya
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison 
> 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice 
> > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still 
> > not been merged!
> >
> > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed 
> > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec 
> > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> >
> > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use 
> > compression..level configurations instead of a single 
> > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the 
> > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2] 
> > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected 
> > section.
> >
> > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if 
> > you have any feedback.
> >
> > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > 1: 
> > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > 2:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support
> > +fine-grained+compression+options
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mickael
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > >
> > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > >
> > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > >
> > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by 
> > > moving the compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' 
> > > section, as Ismael proposed.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Dongjin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis 
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including 
> > > > the evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Konstantine
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You 
> > > > > won't be disappointed.
> > > > >
> > > > > As of Present:
> > > > >
> > > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone else?
> > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Divij Vaidya]

Sounds good. I am onboard to start with first steps and eventually move
towards a place where compression codec settings are more generic /
pluggable.
--
Divij Vaidya



On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 3:40 PM Mickael Maison 
wrote:

> Hi Divij,
>
> Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think
> it supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs
> would directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios
> that motivated KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom
> codec.
> I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it
> seems very light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no
> explanations of error scenarios if clients or brokers don't have
> compatible codecs), including the motivation which is important when
> exposing new APIs. On the other hand, KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more
> details with benchmarks to support the motivation.
>
> In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good
> first step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I
> believe one of the reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never
> delivered KIP-390 and nobody was keen on building a KIP on top of
> another undelivered KIP.
>
> Thanks,
> Mickael
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Mickael
> >
> > Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the
> compression
> > completely pluggable
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka
> .
> > If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine
> grain
> > compression controls in Kafka?
> >
> > It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs which
> may
> > satisfy both use cases.
> >
> > --
> > Divij Vaidya
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> > > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
> > > been merged!
> > >
> > > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> > > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> > > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> > >
> > > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> > > compression..level configurations instead of a single
> > > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> > > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> > > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> > > section.
> > >
> > > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
> > > have any feedback.
> > >
> > > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > > 1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > > 2:
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mickael
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > > >
> > > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving
> the
> > > > compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> > > > proposed.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Dongjin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> > > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including
> the
> > > > > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Konstantine
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You
> won't be
> > > > > > disappointed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As of Present:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anyone else?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tom
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss
> > > thread, I
> > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could
> > > list
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee <
> dong...@apache.org>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Mickael Maison]

Hi Divij,

Thanks for bringing that point. After reading KIP-984, I don't think
it supersedes KIP-390/KIP-780. Being able to tune the built-in codecs
would directly benefit many users. It may also cover some scenarios
that motivated KIP-984 without requiring users to write a custom
codec.
I've not commented in the KIP-984 thread yet but at the moment it
seems very light on details (no proposed API for codecs, no
explanations of error scenarios if clients or brokers don't have
compatible codecs), including the motivation which is important when
exposing new APIs. On the other hand, KIP-390/KIP-780 have much more
details with benchmarks to support the motivation.

In my opinion starting with the compression level (KIP-390) is a good
first step and I think we should focus on that and deliver it. I
believe one of the reasons KIP-780 wasn't voted is because we never
delivered KIP-390 and nobody was keen on building a KIP on top of
another undelivered KIP.

Thanks,
Mickael


On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 12:27 PM Divij Vaidya  wrote:
>
> Hey Mickael
>
> Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the compression
> completely pluggable
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka.
> If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine grain
> compression controls in Kafka?
>
> It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs which may
> satisfy both use cases.
>
> --
> Divij Vaidya
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> > improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
> > been merged!
> >
> > The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> > configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> > has its own valid range of levels [0].
> >
> > As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> > compression..level configurations instead of a single
> > compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> > proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> > (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> > section.
> >
> > I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
> > have any feedback.
> >
> > 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> > 1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> > 2:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mickael
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > >
> > > This KIP is now passed with:
> > >
> > > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > >
> > > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving the
> > > compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> > > proposed.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Dongjin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including the
> > > > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Konstantine
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
> > > > > disappointed.
> > > > >
> > > > > As of Present:
> > > > >
> > > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone else?
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Dongjin
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tom
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss
> > thread, I
> > > > > don't
> > > > > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could
> > list
> > > > that
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support
> > Compression
> > > > > Level
> > > > > > > > (rebooted):
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > *A hitchhiker in 

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Divij Vaidya]

Hey Mickael

Since this KIP was written, we have a new proposal to make the compression
completely pluggable
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-984%3A+Add+pluggable+compression+interface+to+Kafka.
If we implement that KIP, would it supersede the need for adding fine grain
compression controls in Kafka?

It might be beneficial to have a joint proposal of these two KIPs which may
satisfy both use cases.

--
Divij Vaidya



On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 11:14 AM Mickael Maison 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
> improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
> been merged!
>
> The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
> configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
> has its own valid range of levels [0].
>
> As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
> compression..level configurations instead of a single
> compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
> proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
> (still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
> section.
>
> I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
> have any feedback.
>
> 0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
> 1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
> 2:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options
>
> Thanks,
> Mickael
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> >
> > This KIP is now passed with:
> >
> > - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> >
> > Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving the
> > compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> > proposed.
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including the
> > > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Konstantine
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > > >
> > > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
> > > > disappointed.
> > > >
> > > > As of Present:
> > > >
> > > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else?
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Dongjin
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma 
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss
> thread, I
> > > > don't
> > > > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could
> list
> > > that
> > > > > as
> > > > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support
> Compression
> > > > Level
> > > > > > > (rebooted):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > > keybase:
> > > > > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > > linkedin:
> > > > > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > > speakerdeck:
> > > > > > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > > > *
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > >
> > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > keybase:
> > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > linkedin:
> > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > speakerdeck:
> > > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > *
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > 

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Mickael Maison]

Hi,

I'm resurrecting this old thread as this KIP would be a nice
improvement and almost 3 years later the PR for this KIP has still not
been merged!

The reason is that during reviews we noticed the proposed
configuration, compression.level, was not easy to use as each codec
has its own valid range of levels [0].

As proposed by Jun in the PR [1], I updated the KIP to use
compression..level configurations instead of a single
compression.level setting. This syntax would also line up with the
proposal to add per-codec configuration options from KIP-780 [2]
(still to be voted). I moved the original proposal to the rejected
section.

I've put the original voters and KIP author on CC. Let me know if you
have any feedback.

0: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826
1: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/10826#issuecomment-1795952612
2: 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-780%3A+Support+fine-grained+compression+options

Thanks,
Mickael


On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:00 AM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
>
> This KIP is now passed with:
>
> - binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
> - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
>
> Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving the
> compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
> proposed.
>
> Best,
> Dongjin
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
>  wrote:
>
> > Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including the
> > evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Konstantine
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> > >
> > > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
> > > disappointed.
> > >
> > > As of Present:
> > >
> > > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> > >
> > > Anyone else?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Dongjin
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Dongjin,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > >
> > > > Tom
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I
> > > don't
> > > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list
> > that
> > > > as
> > > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ismael
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression
> > > Level
> > > > > > (rebooted):
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > keybase:
> > > > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > linkedin:
> > > > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > speakerdeck:
> > > > > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > > *
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > >
> > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > keybase:
> > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > linkedin:
> > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > speakerdeck:
> > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > *
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> *Dongjin Lee*
>
> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
>
>
>
> *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> *

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Dongjin Lee]

This KIP is now passed with:

- binding: +3 (Ismael, Tom, Konstantine)
- non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)

Thanks again to all the supporters. I also updated the KIP by moving the
compression buffer option into the 'Future Works' section, as Ismael
proposed.

Best,
Dongjin



On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 3:03 AM Konstantine Karantasis
 wrote:

> Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including the
> evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Konstantine
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
>
> > Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
> >
> > I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
> > disappointed.
> >
> > As of Present:
> >
> > - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> > - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
> >
> > Anyone else?
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dongjin,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Tom
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I
> > don't
> > > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list
> that
> > > as
> > > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > > >
> > > > Ismael
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression
> > Level
> > > > > (rebooted):
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Dongjin
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > >
> > > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > keybase:
> > > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > linkedin:
> > > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > speakerdeck:
> > > > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > linkedin:
> kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > speakerdeck:
> > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > *
> >
>


-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Konstantine Karantasis]

Makes sense. Looks like a good improvement. Thanks for including the
evaluation in the proposal Dongjin.

+1 (binding)

Konstantine

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 6:59 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:

> Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,
>
> I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
> disappointed.
>
> As of Present:
>
> - binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
> - non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)
>
> Anyone else?
>
> Best,
> Dongjin
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  wrote:
>
> > Hi Dongjin,
> >
> > Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:
> >
> > > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I
> don't
> > > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list that
> > as
> > > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> > >
> > > Ismael
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression
> Level
> > > > (rebooted):
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Dongjin
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > >
> > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > keybase:
> > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > linkedin:
> > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > speakerdeck:
> > > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > *
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> *Dongjin Lee*
>
> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
>
>
>
> *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> speakerdeck:
> speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> *
>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Dongjin Lee]

Thanks Ismel, Tom and Ryanne,

I am now updating the KIP about the further works. Sure, You won't be
disappointed.

As of Present:

- binding: +2 (Ismael, Tom)
- non-binding: +1 (Ryanne)

Anyone else?

Best,
Dongjin

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 2:03 AM Tom Bentley  wrote:

> Hi Dongjin,
>
> Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Tom
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:
>
> > I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I don't
> > think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list that
> as
> > future work vs rejected alternatives.
> >
> > Ismael
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
> > > (rebooted):
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Dongjin
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > >
> > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > keybase:
> > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > linkedin:
> > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > speakerdeck:
> > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > *
> > >
> >
>


-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Tom Bentley]

Hi Dongjin,

Thanks for the KIP, +1 (binding).

Kind regards,

Tom

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:16 PM Ismael Juma  wrote:

> I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I don't
> think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list that as
> future work vs rejected alternatives.
>
> Ismael
>
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
> > (rebooted):
> >
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > linkedin:
> kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > speakerdeck:
> > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > *
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Ismael Juma]

I'm +1 on the proposed change. As I stated in the discuss thread, I don't
think we should rule out the buffer size config, but we could list that as
future work vs rejected alternatives.

Ismael

On Sat, Jun 5, 2021 at 2:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
> (rebooted):
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
>
> Best,
> Dongjin
>
> --
> *Dongjin Lee*
>
> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
>
>
>
> *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> speakerdeck:
> speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> *
>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Dongjin Lee]

Bumping up the voting thread.

Please note that today is the KIP freeze day. +1 non-binding until now.

Thanks,
Dongjin

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 11:47 PM Ryanne Dolan  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding), thanks!
>
> Ryanne
>
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2021, 4:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
> > (rebooted):
> >
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> > keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > linkedin:
> kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > speakerdeck:
> > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > *
> >
>


-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*

Re: [VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Ryanne Dolan]

+1 (non-binding), thanks!

Ryanne

On Sat, Jun 5, 2021, 4:37 PM Dongjin Lee  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
> (rebooted):
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level
>
> Best,
> Dongjin
>
> --
> *Dongjin Lee*
>
> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
>
>
>
> *github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
> keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> speakerdeck:
> speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> *
>

[VOTE] KIP-390: Support Compression Level (rebooted)

[Dongjin Lee]

Hi all,

I'd like to open a voting thread for KIP-390: Support Compression Level
(rebooted):

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-390%3A+Support+Compression+Level

Best,
Dongjin

-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  github.com/dongjinleekr
keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
*