Re: 1.0.0 KIPs Update

Would it be possible to add KIP-183 to the list too, please? Thanks, Tom On 6 September 2017 at 22:04, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hi Vahid, > > Yes I have just added it while sending this email :) > > > Guozhang > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Vahid S Hashemian < >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

his so that we don't increase > the tech debt that already exists. > > Ismael > > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Jun, > > > > You're correct about those other expected errors. If it's OK to update >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

Hi Colin, Thanks for taking the time to respond. On 5 September 2017 at 22:22, Colin McCabe wrote: > ... > Why does there need to be a map at all in the API? >From a purely technical PoV there doesn't, but doing something else would make the API inconsistent with other

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Hi Ted and Colin, Thanks for the comments. It seems you're both happier with reassign rather than assign, so I'm happy to stick with that. On 5 September 2017 at 18:46, Colin McCabe wrote: > ... > Do we expect that reducing the number of partitions will ever be >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-170: Enhanced TopicCreatePolicy and introduction of TopicDeletePolicy

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

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

eople have. On 30 August 2017 at 16:17, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > I've updated the KIP as follows: > > * remove the APIs supporting progress reporting in favour of the APIs > being implemented in KIP-113. > * added some APIs to co

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

partitions argument was null, and if there was an error let the exception propagate out of electPreferredLeaders() directly. Sorry about having to ask about this once people have already voted, but what do people think about these options? Thanks, Tom On 30 August 2017 at 16:55, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gm

Re: [VOTE] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

this, but it would be helpful for people using the AdminClient to know the kinds of errors they should expect, for testing purposes for example. On the other hand it's a maintenance burden. Should we start documenting likely errors like this? Cheers, Tom On 4 September 2017 at 10:10, Tom Bentley

Re: [VOTE] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

gress exception, (3) can't move to > > the preferred replica exception (i.e., preferred replica not in sync > yet). > > > > Jun > > > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all,

Re: Dry-run option for new admin commands

Hi Viktor, KIP-179's reassignPartitions() API already has a validateOnly() option. There's no technical barrier to adding similar options to the other state-changing APIs in that KIP, if people think it would be useful. Please comment to say this on the [DISCUSS] thread for the KIP though. In

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

nded to mention the changes in the VOTE thread as a > heads up. Generally, we don't restart the vote unless the changes are > significant. > > Ismael > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Ismael, > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

er`. The next > point is that this is a batch API, so it should ideally be plural like the > other AdminClient methods. Maybe `electPreferredReplicasAsLeaders`, but > that's quite a mouthful. Maybe we should shorten it to > `electPreferredLeaders`. Thoughts? > > Ismael > > On Wed,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

es that the options make sense for all alterations. Cheers, Tom On 22 August 2017 at 23:49, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017, at 07:17, Tom Bentley wrote: > > Hi Dong and Jun, > > > > Thanks again for your input in this discussion and on KIP

[VOTE] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

Hi all, I would like to start the vote on KIP-183 which will provide an AdminClient interface for electing the preferred replica, and refactor the kafka-preferred-replica-election.sh tool to use this interface. More details here:

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

Hi Colin, Thanks for your input. A couple of comments inline. On 22 August 2017 at 21:42, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the KIP. It looks good overall. > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017, at 08:54, Tom Bentley wrote: > > Hi Jun, >

Re: each file of the kafka data will be opened 70+ times

I think your lsof output is listing threads, not simply processes (if you look at the output instead of piping it to wc you'll see that the PID is the same and only the TID is different). If you use `lsof /opt/kafka/data/...` (i.e without the grep) instead it will just show the processes. On 22

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

t, any new > PreferredLeaderElectionRequest > will be responded immediately with a REPLICA_LEADER_ELECTION_IN_PROGRESS > error. > > Does this sound good to you? > > Thanks, > > Jun > > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Jun,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

mail, I thought you were proposing to have > PartitionReassignmentRequest > dealing with both inter and intra broker data movement (i.e., include log > dirs in the request). Then, I am not sure how this request will be > processed on the broker. So, you were not proposing that? > > Thanks, > &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

Hi Jun and Dong, Thanks for your replies... On 10 August 2017 at 20:43, Dong Lin wrote: > This is a very good idea. I have updated the KIP-113 so that > DescribeDirResponse returns lag instead of LEO. Excellent! On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Jun Rao

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

Hi Jun, Thanks for your reply, I've got a few comment inline... On 11 August 2017 at 01:51, Jun Rao wrote: > Hi, Tom, > > Thanks for the KIP. Looks good overall. A few minor comments. > > 1. In most requests with topic partitions, we nest partitions inside topic. > So,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

ming no one can see any glaring holes in what I'm proposing here, or wants to suggest a workable alternative set of APIs and algorithms, then I'll update KIP-179 to this effect. Thanks for taking the time to read this far! Tom On 10 August 2017 at 11:56, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.c

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

; wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, Dong, > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I think Tom was suggesting to have the AlterTopicsRequest sent > to > > > any > > > >> > > broker, which just write

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

PI in AdminClient instead: > > > > AlterTopicsResult alterTopics(Map<TopicPartition, List> > > partitionAssignment, AlterTopicsOptions options) > > > > - Do you think "reassignPartitions" may be a better name than > > "alterTopics"? This is more co

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

ully caught up. I am wondering if it's better to instead > > return the lag in offset per replica. This way, the status can probably > be > > reported more reliably. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Dong Lin <lindon...@gm

Re: 答复: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Size-based log directory selection strategy

Hi Hu, I wonder whether changing, or configuring a size-balancing strategy would be sufficient for all users. I would expect that users might want to take other factors into account. For example, with KIP-113, balancing IO across the disks might also be a factor, in addition to balancing free

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

ler that was changing it, avoiding the possibility of races. For now I've kept this error code in the KIP, but happy to revise that if this interpretation is wrong. > -Ewen > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

Hi Dong, Replies inline, as usual > As I originally envisaged it, KIP-179's support for reassigning partitions > > would have more-or-less taken the logic currently in the > > ReassignPartitionsCommand (that is, writing JSON to the > > ZkUtils.ReassignPartitionsPath) > > and put it behind a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-176 : Remove deprecated new-consumer option for tools

The KIP is here for any one, like me, who hasn't seen it yet: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-176:+Remove+deprecated+new-consumer+option+for+tools Paolo, the KIP says "On the next release cycle we could totally remove the option." Exactly which release are you proposing that

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

Hi Dong, Thanks for your reply. Yeah I agree with you that the total disk capacity can be useful > particularly if it is different across brokers but it is probably of > limited use in most cases. I also expect that most users would have their > own customized tool across to determine the new

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

> > > > Also, how do you think things would work in the context of KIP-179? Would > > the tool still invoke these requests or would it be done by the broker > > receiving the alterTopics/reassignPartitions protocol call? > > > > My gut feel is that the tool will still invoke these requests. But I

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

nager a homogeneous cluster. If this is not the case then I think we > should include this information in the response. > > Thanks, > Dong > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:44 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi Dong, > > > > Your comments on KIP-17

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

by topic name. This would make for smaller messages when triggering elections for multiple partitions of the same topic. I'd be grateful for any feedback you may have. Cheers, Tom On 2 August 2017 at 18:34, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > In a similar vein to KIP-179 I've cr

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-113: Support replicas movement between log directories

Hi Dong, Your comments on KIP-179 prompted me to look at KIP-113, and I have a question: AFAICS the DescribeDirsResponse (via ReplicaInfo) can be used to get the size of a partition on a disk, but I don't see a mechanism for knowing the total capacity of a disk (and/or the free capacity of a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

t; TopicPartitionReplica, which identifies the topic, partition and the > brokerId. replicaStatus can then take a list of TopicPartitionReplica as > input. And its output maps the replica to replica status. The latter API > seems simpler and also matches the method name better. What do

[DISCUSS] KIP-183 - Change PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

In a similar vein to KIP-179 I've created KIP-183 ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-183+-+Change+PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand+to+use+AdminClient) which is about deprecating the --zookeeper option to kafka-preferred-replica-election.sh and replacing it with an option

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5693) TopicCreationPolicy and AlterConfigsPolicy overlap

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5693: -- Summary: TopicCreationPolicy and AlterConfigsPolicy overlap Key: KAFKA-5693 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5693 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Bug

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5692) Refactor PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5692: -- Summary: Refactor PreferredReplicaLeaderElectionCommand to use AdminClient Key: KAFKA-5692 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5692 Project: Kafka

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Hi again Ismael, 1. It's worth emphasising that reassigning partitions is a different >> process than what happens when a topic is created, so not sure trying to >> make it symmetric is beneficial. In addition to what was already >> discussed, >> one should also enable replication throttling

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

ten include multiple error codes (due to batching). > > 3. In my opinion, the warning when someone updates configs via > `kafka-topic.sh` was a mistake. Doing the same thing via the configs tool > is quite clunky in comparison. > > Ismael > > On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:52 PM, To

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

> Regarding adding the possibility to alter the topic config through the > AlterTopic API, the current TopicCommand implementation provides a warning > on doing this suggesting to use the ConfigCommand tool. So it would be a > step back allowing to do the configs change with the alter topic as

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

rth thinking whether having 2 separate protocol APIs would be > better. I can see pros and cons, so I'd be interested in what you and > others think. > > Ismael > > On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I have

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

July 2017 at 11:45, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've updated the KIP to fix those niggles, but I've not factored out the > topic name from the ReplicaStatusRequest, yet. > > Looking at the topic creation APIs in more detail, the CreateTopicsOptions > has > >

Re: Command tools : from Scala to Java, from Zookeeper utils to Admin Client API

Hi Paolo, Replies in line... On 28 July 2017 at 11:14, Paolo Patierno wrote: > Hi committers, > > in my understanding there is the common idea to move all tools from Scala > to Java and then using the new Admin Client API instead of using the > Zookeeper connection. > >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

API to track the progress of that replication, I'm inclined to think that having a timeout is a bit pointless. But should the replicaStatus() API have a timeout? I suppose it probably should. On 26 July 2017 at 10:58, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Tha

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Thanks Paolo, * in the "Public Interfaces" section you wrote > alterTopics(Set) but then a collection is used (instead of a > set) in the Proposed Changes section. I'm ok with collection. > Agree it should be Collection. > * in the summary of the alterTopics method you say "The request

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

gt; If we agree to do that, then we need to decide if it should be implemented > client-side or by adding a protocol API. The former is simpler, but the > latter would allow non Java clients to use it without duplicating the logic > of assigning replicas to the new partitions. Wh

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

would give the impression that it has not). On 21 July 2017 at 11:09, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Aside: I've started this new DISCUSS thread for KIP-179 since the original > one had the incorrect KIP number 178. The original thread can be found > he

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

smael > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:12 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Ismael, > > > > I've been working on the progress reporting assuming that it would be > > acceptable for the ReassignPartitionsCommand to poll the AdminClie

[DISCUSS] KIP-179: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Aside: I've started this new DISCUSS thread for KIP-179 since the original one had the incorrect KIP number 178. The original thread can be found here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/kafka-dev/201707.mbox/%3cCAMd5YszudP+-8z5KTbFh6JscT2p4xFi1=vzwwx+5dccpxry...@mail.gmail.com%3e I've just

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

, Tom On 19 July 2017 at 16:08, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ah, thank you! I took the number from the "Next KIP Number: 178" on the > KIP index and didn't check the tables. So this is now KIP-179. The old link > will point you to the right place. >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

ke there is already a KIP-178: > > KIP-178: Size-based log directory selection strategy > > Ismael > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > OK, I will work on adding support for this to the KIP, with the intention &g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

on can often be done in stages. > > Does that make sense? > > Ismael > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Ismael, > > > > Answers in-line: > > > > 1. Have you considered how progress would b

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Hi Ismael, Answers in-line: 1. Have you considered how progress would be reported? Partition > reassignment can take a long time and it would be good to have a mechanism > for progress reporting. > The ReassignPartitionsCommand doesn't currently have a mechanism to track progress. All you can

[DISCUSS] KIP-178: Change ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Hi, I've written KIP-178 ( https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-178+-+Change+ReassignPartitionsCommand+to+use+AdminClient) for changing the ReassignPartitionsCommand (a.k.a. kafka-reassign-partitions.sh)to remove the dependency on ZooKeeper and instead provide the same

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5601) Refactor ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5601: -- Summary: Refactor ReassignPartitionsCommand to use AdminClient Key: KAFKA-5601 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5601 Project: Kafka Issue Type

Comments on JIRAs

The project recently switched from all JIRA events being sent to the dev mailling list, to just issue creations. This seems like a good thing because the dev mailling list was very noisy before, and if you want to see all the JIRA comments etc you can subscribe to the JIRA list. If you don't

Re: From Scala to Java based tools : joptsimple vs argparse4j

Hi Paolo, I don't have an opinion about which you should use, but I certainly agree that two option parsing dependencies appears to be 1 too many. Is there a reason why you prefer joptsimple? Cheers, Tom On 10 July 2017 at 08:38, Paolo Patierno wrote: > Hi devs, > > >

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5554) Hilight config settings for particular common use cases

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5554: -- Summary: Hilight config settings for particular common use cases Key: KAFKA-5554 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5554 Project: Kafka Issue Type

Open PRs

I realise that 0.11.0.0 is imminent and so the committers are rightly going to be rather focussed on that, but I opened some PRs nearly a week ago and they don't seem to have been looked at. Even a comment on the PR to the effect of "We'll look at this right after 0.11.0.0" would at least

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5517) Support linking to particular configuration parameters

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5517: -- Summary: Support linking to particular configuration parameters Key: KAFKA-5517 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5517 Project: Kafka Issue Type

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5508) Documentation for altering topics

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5508: -- Summary: Documentation for altering topics Key: KAFKA-5508 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5508 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Bug

Re: Mirroring documentation improvement

Hi Damian, my username is tombentley Thanks Tom On 23 June 2017 at 14:57, Damian Guy <damian@gmail.com> wrote: > Evgeniy, you should now have access. > > Tom & Paolo what are your wiki usernames? > > Thanks, > Damian > > On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 at 14:52

Re: Mirroring documentation improvement

> > My confluence username is evis. > > Best regards, > Evgeny > > С уважением, > Евгений Веретенников > > 2017-06-23 16:43 GMT+03:00 Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com>: > > > Hi Evgeniy, > > > > The wiki page you link to there is

Re: Mirroring documentation improvement

Hi Evgeniy, The wiki page you link to there is about contributing improvements for kafka.apache.org. But since you say "mirroring doc in Confluence" I assume you want to edit https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=27846330, if so you will need one of the committers to

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5496) Consistency in documentation

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5496: -- Summary: Consistency in documentation Key: KAFKA-5496 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5496 Project: Kafka Issue Type: Improvement

Re: Contributor

Thanks! On 21 Jun 2017 4:20 pm, "Damian Guy" <damian@gmail.com> wrote: > Done - thanks > > On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 at 12:19 Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Please can I also be added? My username is tombentley. > > > > Thanks

Re: Contributor

Please can I also be added? My username is tombentley. Thanks Tom On 21 June 2017 at 12:03, Damian Guy wrote: > Hi Andras, > > You should have access now. > > Thanks, > Damian > > On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 at 10:45 Andras Beni wrote: > > > Hi All, > >

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5479) Docs for authorization omit authorizer.class.name

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5479: -- Summary: Docs for authorization omit authorizer.class.name Key: KAFKA-5479 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5479 Project: Kafka Issue Type

Re: JIRA contributor list

According to the website [1] I need to ask to be able to assign JIRAs to myself, but I'm still unable to do this. Could someone set this up for me please? Thanks, Tom [1]: https://kafka.apache.org/contributing On 14 June 2017 at 13:43, Tom Bentley <t.j.bent...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ple

Re: Improving tools: --help

> I just checked kafka-topics.sh and the only required argument there is > --zookeeper option. Not sure if you were thinking of some other command. > > I meant that for kafka-topics.sh --create requires --topic (amongst others), but --list does not. (For example, using these methods we can say

Re: Improving tools: --help

are close to 20 commands I have made changes to. I will try to push > something out by end of day today. So I think I will cover 1) from your > list below and not 2) and 3). > > Thanks Tom. > > Regards, > Mariam. > > > > [image: Inactive hide details for Tom Bentley -

Improving tools: --help

Hi, I noticed that the command line tools could use a little love. For instance, I was surprised that most of them don't support `--help`, and generally there are a few inconsistencies. KIP-14 is dormant and AFAICS no one is working on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-2111 either. So

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-5459) Support kafka-console-producer.sh messages as whole file

Tom Bentley created KAFKA-5459: -- Summary: Support kafka-console-producer.sh messages as whole file Key: KAFKA-5459 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5459 Project: Kafka Issue

Re: [jira] [Commented] (KAFKA-5434) Console consumer hangs if not existing partition is specified

It seems to me that in the most common case the partition isn't going to be magically created and in that case it's more helpful to quit with an error than to sit there waiting for the partition to be created.

[jira] [Commented] (KAFKA-2111) Command Line Standardization - Add Help Arguments & List Required Fields

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-2111?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16049265#comment-16049265 ] Tom Bentley commented on KAFKA-2111: I'm happy work work on this if [~johnma] is no longer looking

JIRA contributor list

Please could I be added to the JIRA contributor list so that I can assign issues to myself? Thanks, Tom

[jira] [Commented] (KAFKA-5421) Getting InvalidRecordException

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-5421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16049037#comment-16049037 ] Tom Bentley commented on KAFKA-5421: The root cause is probably bitrot on the disk storing

Re: Test fail reason on doc fix

Hi Paolo, Usually you can just follow the links added by asfbot on the PR, but these are currently giving 404 (and not just for your failures, so maybe an ASF infrastructure problem?) Cheers, Tom On 12 June 2017 at 09:20, Paolo Patierno wrote: > Hi all, > > > I opened

<    1   2   3   4   5   6