Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Thank you very much for all those that voted. With four binding +1s and zero -1s, this vote passes. Binding +1: * Colin McCabe * Matthias J. Sax * Sophie Blee-Goldman * Jason Gustafson Thanks everyone! Sarwar On Thu, 3 Jun 2021 at 00:16, Jason Gustafson wrote: > +1 overall. There is one

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

+1 overall. There is one complication which I think we may have to address in the implementation. The KIP documents an override to `fillInStackTrace`. Is that necessary? The trace would indeed be useful in this case because the new exception will wrap the exception raised from the Deserializer.

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Thanks for the KIP +1 (binding) - Sophie On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 3:43 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On 6/2/21 2:34 PM, Colin McCabe wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > > > Thanks, Sarwar. > > > > best, > > Colin > > > > On Wed, Jun 2, 2021, at 13:29, Sarwar Bhuiyan wrote: > >> Thanks

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

+1 (binding) On 6/2/21 2:34 PM, Colin McCabe wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Thanks, Sarwar. > > best, > Colin > > On Wed, Jun 2, 2021, at 13:29, Sarwar Bhuiyan wrote: >> Thanks Colin, Matthias, and Jason on the discussion on this really old KIP. >> >> As discussed, I'd like to start to vote on

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

+1 (binding) Thanks, Sarwar. best, Colin On Wed, Jun 2, 2021, at 13:29, Sarwar Bhuiyan wrote: > Thanks Colin, Matthias, and Jason on the discussion on this really old KIP. > > As discussed, I'd like to start to vote on KIP-334: >

[VOTE] KIP-334 - Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Thanks Colin, Matthias, and Jason on the discussion on this really old KIP. As discussed, I'd like to start to vote on KIP-334: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=87297793 Thank you. Sarwar -- [image: Confluent] Sarwar Bhuiyan Staff

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

;> personally find that misleading. > > >> > > > >>> >> >>> > > >> > > > >>> >> >>> Hmm. I think that by definition, corrupt records are > > >> records > > >> > > > that > &g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

>> > > > >>> >> >>> only if) the message is corrupt, it can't be > >> deserialized. If > >> > > > >>> (and > >> > > > >>> >> only > >> > > > >>> >> >>> if) it can't

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

gt;>> >> > > > >>> >> >>>> >> > > > >>> >> >>>> In the end, I think it might be worth it to have a bit >> of a >> > > > >>> >> >>>> wider-encompassing `FaultyRecordException

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

;> class > > > > >>> >> >>> should also be a kind of serialization exception. Not > > > something > > > > >>> more > > > > >>> >> >>> general. > > > > >>> >> >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

gt;>> >> >>>> partition/offset is future backwards-compatibility. If there > > is > > > >>> ever > > > >>> >> a > > > >>> >> >>> new > > > >>> >> >>>> scenario that wo

[VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Hey there, I'm restarting the vote thread for KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation We had some discussions on the previous vote thread which I believe were

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

an exception and this will provide some > > >>> >> >>>> backward-compatibility with older clients. > > >>> >> >>> > > >>> >> >>> Hmm. Can you think of any new scenarios that would make Kafka > &g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

on't know how many. > >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >>> If we really want to have something more general, perhaps we > need > >>> >> >>> something like LostDataException. But in that case, we can't > >>> inherit > >>> >> &

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

n >>> >> >>> issues. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> best, >>> >> >>> Colin >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>&g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

t; >> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>> Hi Stanislav, >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Thanks for the KIP. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

;> the > >> >>>>> record, not with any of those those things. So we should choose a > >> >> name > >> >>>>> that reflects that serialization is the problem. How about > >> >>>>> RecordSerializationException? > >>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

zationException? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> best, >> >>>>> Colin >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018, at 15:11, Stanislav Kozlovski wrote: >> >&g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

amiliar with Java > >>> conventions. > >>>>> I > >>>>>> agree it is a non-ideal way for the user to catch the exception so > >> I > >>>>>> changed it back. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

>>>>> public exception `FaultyRecordException` which is thrown to the >> user >>> in >>>>>> both scenarios (corrupt record and deserialization error). >>>>>> Please take a look again. >>>>>> >>

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

oticed it earlier from your example, but I just > > realized > > > > > > that interfaces don't mix well with exceptions. There is no way > to > > > > catch > > > > > > the interface type, which means you have to depend on instanceof > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

s. There is no way to > > > catch > > > > > the interface type, which means you have to depend on instanceof > > > checks, > > > > > which is not very conventional. At the moment, we raise > > > > > SerializationException if there is

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Since > > > > SerializationException extends KafkaExeption, it seems like we can > > handle > > > > both cases in a compatible way by handling both cases with a single > > type > > > > that extends SerializationException. Maybe something like > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

handle > > > both cases in a compatible way by handling both cases with a single > type > > > that extends SerializationException. Maybe something like > > > RecordDeserializationException? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Jason > > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

tends SerializationException. Maybe something like > > RecordDeserializationException? > > > > Thanks, > > Jason > > > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:45 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > ---- Original message ----From: Stanisl

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

zationException? > > Thanks, > Jason > > On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 5:45 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > > > +1 > > Original message From: Stanislav Kozlovski < > > stanis...@confluent.io> Date: 8/2/18 2:41 AM (GMT-08:00) To: > > dev@kafka.a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

org Subject: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in > exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation > Hey everybody, > > I'd like to start a vote thread for KIP-334 Include partitions in > exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation > <ht

Re: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

+1 Original message From: Stanislav Kozlovski Date: 8/2/18 2:41 AM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation Hey everybody, I'd like to start a vote thread for KIP

[VOTE] KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation

Hey everybody, I'd like to start a vote thread for KIP-334 Include partitions in exceptions raised during consumer record deserialization/validation -- Best, Stanislav