Hi David Jacot,
I cherry picked this commit https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/11511
to the 3.1 branch to fix the kafka.metrics.MetricsTest integration
tests for that branch.
Thanks,
-Jose
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 8:09 AM David Jacot wrote:
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for bringing this up. I do
Hi Jason,
Thanks for bringing this up. I do agree with you that it makes sense
to include this follow up to correctly fix the entire issue in 3.1.
Thanks,
David
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 9:01 PM Jason Gustafson
wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> I think we should get
Hi David,
I think we should get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13488.
This is a follow-up to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12257,
which was previously considered a 3.0 blocker. Without the additional
patch, the bug causing the consumer to get stuck can still occur in a
Hi Justine,
I am +1 on getting this in the 3.1 release as it is a serious
regression in clusters with a high number of partitions.
Thanks,
David
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 10:39 PM Justine Olshan
wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I've filed a bug for an extra map allocation that is used in the fetch
> path.
Hi all,
I've filed a bug for an extra map allocation that is used in the fetch
path. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13512
I think it qualifies as a blocker since this path is used pretty frequently
and it looks to be a regression.
I also have a PR open to fix the issue. With this
Hi Rajini,
Interesting bug. The patch seems to be low risk so I suppose that
it is fine to keep it in 3.1.0.
Thanks,
David
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:26 PM David Jacot wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks for the heads up. It makes sense to include it in order
> to keep the KRaft inline with ZK
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the heads up. It makes sense to include it in order
to keep the KRaft inline with ZK behavior.
Thanks,
David
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:44 AM Rajini Sivaram wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Sorry, I had completely forgotten about code freeze and merged
>
Hi David,
Sorry, I had completely forgotten about code freeze and merged
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13461 to 3.1 branch yesterday.
Can you take a look and see if we want it in 3.1.0? It is not a regression
in 3.1, but we see this issue in tests and when it happens, the controller
Hi David,
We'd like to include "KAFKA-13490: Fix createTopics and incrementalAlterConfigs
for KRaft mode #11416" in the upcoming release. This fixes some bugs in how
createTopics and incrementalAlterConfigs are handled by the controller. It is
specific to KRaft, so will not affect ZK mode.
Hi Mickael,
Thanks for reporting it. It makes sense to include it in the 3.1 release
as well as it is a regression.
Thanks,
David
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 6:52 PM Mickael Maison wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> Can we also consider https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13397?
> It's essentially a
Hi David,
Can we also consider https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13397?
It's essentially a regression but in a very specific case. To hit it,
you must be running MirrorMaker in dedicated mode and have changed the
separator of the default replication policy.
Thanks,
Mickael
On Tue, Nov
Hi Ron,
Thank you for reaching out about this. While this is clearly not a
regression, I agree with including it in 3.1 in order to have proper
and correct configuration constraints for KRaft. You can proceed.
Cheers,
David
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 2:55 PM Ron Dagostino wrote:
>
> Hi David. I
Hi David. I would like to nominate
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/KAFKA/issues/KAFKA-13456
"Tighten KRaft config checks/constraints" as a 3.1.0 blocker. The
existing configuration constraints/checks related to KRaft currently
do not eliminate certain illegal configuration combinations.
Hi Chris,
Thanks for reporting both issues. As both are regressions, I do agree that
they are blockers and that we would fix them for 3.1.
Cheers,
David
On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 10:50 PM Chris Egerton
wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
> I have another blocker to propose. KAFKA-13472 (
>
Hi David,
I have another blocker to propose. KAFKA-13472 (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13472) is another regression in
Connect caused by recently-merged changes for KAFKA-12487 (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12487) which can lead to data
loss in sink connectors in
Hi David,
I'd like to propose KAFKA-13469 (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13469) as a blocker. It is a
regression in Connect caused by recently-merged changes for KAFKA-12226 (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12226) which leads to duplicate
records for source tasks. I
Hi folks,
We reached the code freeze for the Apache Kafka 3.1 release on Friday.
Therefore,
we will only accept blockers from now on.
There already are a couple of blockers identified which were not
completed before
the code freeze. Please, raise any new blockers to this thread.
For all the
Hi David,
Please update the components of the following KIPs:
- KIP-390: Support Compression Level - Core, Clients
- KIP-653: Upgrade log4j to log4j2 - Clients, Connect, Core, Streams (that
is, Log4j-appender, Tools, and Trogdor are excluded.)
Best,
Dongjin
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 2:24 AM
Hi David,
I've moved KIP-618 to the "postponed" section as it will not be merged in
time due to lack of review.
Cheers,
Chris
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 1:07 PM David Jacot
wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> Just a quick reminder that the Feature freeze is tomorrow (October 29th).
> In order to be fair with
Hi team,
Just a quick reminder that the Feature freeze is tomorrow (October 29th).
In order to be fair with everyone in all the time zones, I plan to cut the
release branch early next week.
Cheers,
David
On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 9:56 AM David Jacot wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> KIP freeze for the next
Hi team,
KIP freeze for the next major release of Apache Kafka was reached last week.
I have updated the release plan with all the adopted KIPs which are
considered
for AK 3.1.0. Please, verify the plan and let me know if any KIP should be
added
to or removed from the release plan.
For the KIPs
Hi folks,
Just a quick reminder that the KIP freeze is today. Don't forget to close
your ongoing votes.
Best,
David
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 5:31 PM David Jacot wrote:
> Hi Luke,
>
> Added it to the plan.
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:09 AM Luke Chen wrote:
>
>> Hi David,
Hi Luke,
Added it to the plan.
Thanks,
David
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:09 AM Luke Chen wrote:
> Hi David,
> KIP-766 is merged into trunk. Please help add it into the release plan.
>
> Thank you.
> Luke
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:50 PM David Jacot
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > Sure.
Hi David,
KIP-766 is merged into trunk. Please help add it into the release plan.
Thank you.
Luke
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:50 PM David Jacot
wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Sure. I have updated the release plan to include it. Thanks for the
> heads up.
>
> Best,
> David
>
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at
Hi Michael,
Sure. I have updated the release plan to include it. Thanks for the
heads up.
Best,
David
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 4:39 PM Mickael Maison
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> You can add KIP-690 to the release plan. The vote passed months ago
> and I merged the PR today.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Fri,
Hi David,
You can add KIP-690 to the release plan. The vote passed months ago
and I merged the PR today.
Thanks
On Fri, Oct 8, 2021 at 8:32 AM David Jacot wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> Just a quick reminder that KIP Freeze is next Friday, October 15th.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021
Hi folks,
Just a quick reminder that KIP Freeze is next Friday, October 15th.
Cheers,
David
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 3:52 PM Chris Egerton
wrote:
> Thanks David!
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:56 AM David Jacot
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > Sure thing. I have added KIP-618 to the release
Thanks David!
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:56 AM David Jacot
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Sure thing. I have added KIP-618 to the release plan. Thanks for the heads
> up.
>
> Best,
> David
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:53 AM David Jacot wrote:
>
> > Hi Kirk,
> >
> > Yes, it is definitely possible if
Hi Chris,
Sure thing. I have added KIP-618 to the release plan. Thanks for the heads
up.
Best,
David
On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:53 AM David Jacot wrote:
> Hi Kirk,
>
> Yes, it is definitely possible if you can get the KIP voted before the KIP
> freeze
> and the code committed before the
Hi Kirk,
Yes, it is definitely possible if you can get the KIP voted before the KIP
freeze
and the code committed before the feature freeze. Please, let me know when
the
KIP is voted and I will add it to the release plan.
Thanks,
David
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 7:05 PM Chris Egerton
wrote:
> Hi
Hi David,
Wondering if we can get KIP-618 included? The vote passed months ago and a
PR has been available since mid-June.
Cheers,
Chris
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:53 PM Kirk True wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Is it possible to try to get KIP-768 in 3.1? I have put it up for a vote
> and have much
Hi David,
Is it possible to try to get KIP-768 in 3.1? I have put it up for a vote and
have much of it implemented already.
Thanks,
Kirk
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, at 3:11 AM, Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Ok. Sounds good, David.
>
> Let’s forge ahead. The plan looks good.
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 4:02
Ok. Sounds good, David.
Let’s forge ahead. The plan looks good.
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 4:02 AM David Jacot
wrote:
> Hi Israel,
>
> Yeah, 3.0 took quite a long time to be released. However, I think
> that we should stick to our time based release.
>
> Best,
> David
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021
Hi Israel,
Yeah, 3.0 took quite a long time to be released. However, I think
that we should stick to our time based release.
Best,
David
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 9:59 AM David Jacot wrote:
> Hi Bruno,
>
> Thanks for the heads up. I have removed it from the plan.
>
> Best,
> David
>
> On Mon,
Hi Bruno,
Thanks for the heads up. I have removed it from the plan.
Best,
David
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 11:04 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thank you for the plan!
>
> KIP-698 will not make it for 3.1.0. Could you please remove it from the
> plan?
>
> Best,
> Bruno
>
> On 24.09.21
Hi David,
Thank you for the plan!
KIP-698 will not make it for 3.1.0. Could you please remove it from the
plan?
Best,
Bruno
On 24.09.21 16:22, David Jacot wrote:
Hi all,
I just published a release plan here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.1.0
The plan
Thank you David for running the release.
The plan looks good to me in terms of the planned content and on another
hand it feels a bit soon given we just pushed out 3.0
I feel users might decide to wait for 3.1 instead of upgrading to 3.0 from
earlier versions since it is going to be out in
Thanks David for running the 3.1.0 release. The proposed plan looks great,
+1.
On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 19:52, David Jacot
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just published a release plan here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.1.0
>
> The plan suggests the following dates:
Hi all,
I just published a release plan here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.1.0
The plan suggests the following dates:
KIP Freeze: 15 October 2021
Feature Freeze: 29 October 2021
Code Freeze: 12 November 2021
At least two weeks of stabilization will follow
+1 (non-binding). Thanks for volunteering David!
Best,
On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 12:14 AM Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Forgot to confirm in my last message, though it was implied. I am a +1 as
> well. Thank you, David.
>
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 8:54 AM Israel Ekpo wrote:
>
> > Thanks for volunteering
Forgot to confirm in my last message, though it was implied. I am a +1 as
well. Thank you, David.
On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 8:54 AM Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Thanks for volunteering David. It’s great that we are already planning the
> 3.1.0 release.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:38 PM Bill Bejeck
Thanks for volunteering!
+1 (non-binding)
Look forward to V3.1.0!
Thank you.
Luke
On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 8:55 PM Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Thanks for volunteering David. It’s great that we are already planning the
> 3.1.0 release.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:38 PM Bill Bejeck wrote:
>
> >
Thanks for volunteering David. It’s great that we are already planning the
3.1.0 release.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:38 PM Bill Bejeck wrote:
> Thanks for volunteering for the 3.1.0 release David!
>
> It's a +1 from me.
>
> -Bill
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:08 PM Konstantine Karantasis <
>
Thanks for volunteering for the 3.1.0 release David!
It's a +1 from me.
-Bill
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 3:08 PM Konstantine Karantasis <
kkaranta...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for volunteering to run 3.1.0 David!
>
> +1
>
> Konstantine
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 6:42 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
>
Thanks for volunteering to run 3.1.0 David!
+1
Konstantine
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 6:42 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
> +1, thanks for volunteering David!
>
> Ismael
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 6:47 AM David Jacot
> wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I'd like to volunteer to be the release manager for
+1, thanks for volunteering David!
Ismael
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 6:47 AM David Jacot
wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I'd like to volunteer to be the release manager for our next
> feature release, 3.1.0. If there are no objections, I'll send
> out the release plan soon.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
Hello All,
I'd like to volunteer to be the release manager for our next
feature release, 3.1.0. If there are no objections, I'll send
out the release plan soon.
Regards,
David
47 matches
Mail list logo
