Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Ismael, I have updated the KIP. Let me know if everything looks fine then I will begin voting. Thanks, Mayuresh On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 9:06 AM, Mayuresh Gharat wrote: > Hi Ismael, > > I agree. I will change the compatibility para and start voting. > > Thanks,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Ismael, I agree. I will change the compatibility para and start voting. Thanks, Mayuresh On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Ismael Juma wrote: > Hi, > > I think error messages and error codes serve different purposes. Error > messages provide additional information about

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi, I think error messages and error codes serve different purposes. Error messages provide additional information about the error, but users should never have to match on a message to handle an error/exception. For this case, it seems like this is a fatal error so we could get away with just

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

I think, it's OK to do this right now. The other KIP will have a wider base to cover as it will include other exceptions as well and will take time. Thanks, Mayuresh On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:20 PM Dong Lin wrote: > Sorry, I forget that you have mentioned this idea in

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Sorry, I forget that you have mentioned this idea in your previous reply. I guess the question is, do we still need this KIP if we can have custom error message specified in the exception via the other KIP? On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Mayuresh Gharat < gharatmayures...@gmail.com> wrote: >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Dong, I do agree with that as I said before the thought did cross my mind and I am working on getting another KIP ready to have error responses returned back to the client. In my opinion, it's OK to add a new error code if it justifies the need. As Ismael, mentioned on the jira, we need a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hey Mayuresh, I get that you want to provide a more specific error message to user. Then would it be more useful to have a KIP that allows custom error message to be returned to client together with the exception in the response? For example, broker can include in the response

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Dong, I had thought about this before and wanted to do similar thing. But as was pointed out in the jira ticket, we wanted something more specific than general. The main issue is that we do not propagate server side error messages to clients, right now. I am working on a KIP proposal to

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hey Mayuresh, Thanks for the patch. I am wondering if it would be better to add a more general error, e.g. InvalidMessageException. The benefit is that we can reuse this for other message level error instead of adding one exception class for each possible exception in the future. This is similar

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Mayuresh, The relevant PR was merged last Friday. :) Starting the vote is fine by me. Ismael On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Mayuresh Gharat wrote: > Hi Ismael, > > Sure we can do that. Just wanted to check on the timeline on when this can > go in. > I can

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi Ismael, Sure we can do that. Just wanted to check on the timeline on when this can go in. I can wait till the new ProduceRequest gets in to trunk. On the other hand we can also support it in the existing code. I am fine either ways. Should I start Vote on this, so that we can get this

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Thanks for the KIP Mayuresh. I suggest we only throw this error for ProduceRequest version 3, which is being introduced with KIP-98 (Exactly-once). That way, the compatibility story is clearer, in my opinion. Ismael On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Mayuresh Gharat < gharatmayures...@gmail.com>

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi James, I meant that "it is recommended to upgrade clients before upgrading the brokers". Will update the KIP to reflect that. Thanks, Mayuresh On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 4:42 PM, James Cheng wrote: > Mayuresh, > > The Compatibility/Migration section says to upgrade the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Mayuresh, The Compatibility/Migration section says to upgrade the clients first, before the brokers. Are you talking about implementation or deployment? Do you mean to implement the client changes before the broker changes? That would imply that it would take 2 Kafka releases to implement this

[DISCUSS] KIP-135 : Send of null key to a compacted topic should throw non-retriable error back to user

Hi All, We have created KIP-135 to propose that Kafka should return a non-retriable error when the producer produces a message with null key to a log compacted topic. Please find the KIP wiki in the link :