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

Hi Tom, The updated part in "AdminClient:electPreferredLeaders()" looks reasonable to me. If there is no objections from the voted committer by end of the day, I think you can mark it as accepted. Guozhang On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Tom Bentley wrote: > Unfortunately I've had to make a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-192 : Provide cleaner semantics when idempotence is enabled

+1. A quick clarification question regarding the compatibility plan as for "The legacy values for `enable.idempotence` will be interpreted as follows by the new producer: true will mean required, false will mean off." Right now "enable.idempotence" is defined as Type.BOOLEAN while we are likely t

Re: request for permission to create KIP

Hello Ted, I have granted you the permission. Cheers. Guozhang On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Ted Yu wrote: > Hi, > My wiki username is tedyu > > Can someone grant me permission to create KIP ? > > Thanks > -- -- Guozhang

Re: [VOTE] KIP-198: Remove ZK dependency from Streams Reset Tool

+1, thanks. On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Bill Bejeck wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > Bill > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Matthias J. Sax > wrote: > > > We want to deprecate it for 1.0.0 release. Unclear how long to keep it. > > > > The point is, that the parameter will just be ignored after i

Re: 1.0.0 KIPs Update

7, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Actually my bad, there is already a voting thread and you asked people to > > recast a vote on a small change. > > > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > > > > > Hi Tom, > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-182 - Reduce Streams DSL overloads and allow easier use of custom storage engines

ow closed and the KIP has been accepted with: > > 2 non binding votes - bill and matthias > > 3 binding - Damian, Guozhang, Sriram > > > > Regards, > > Damian > > > > On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 at 22:24 Sriram Subramanian wrote: > > > >> +1 >

Re: [ANNOUCE] Apache Kafka 0.11.0.1 Released

gi?path=/kafka/0.11.0. > 0/kafka_2.12-0.11.0.0.tgz> > <https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi?path=/kafka/0.11.0.1/ > kafka_2.12-0.11.0.1.tgz > <https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi?path=/kafka/0.11.0. > 0/kafka_2.12-0.11.0.0.tgz> > >* > > > A big thank you f

Re: [VOTE] KIP-190: Handle client-ids consistently between clients and brokers

This KIP has three binding votes already but we need to wait 72 hours for the voting thread to complete. I'd take it as "tentative accepted" for 1.0.0 unless someone has a -1 vote before the voting is closed. Guozhang On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jason Gustafson wrote: > +1. Thanks for th

1.0.0 Feature Freeze Update

Hello folks, This is a heads up on 1.0.0 progress post the KIP-deadline: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=71764913 In this release we have a total of 33 KIPs either newly adopted or inherited from the previous release. Among them 15 KIPs has been merged to trunk,

Re: [VOTE] KIP-182 - Reduce Streams DSL overloads and allow easier use of custom storage engines

actic sugar, so perhaps no harm in > keeping it. However, `through` less so, seeing as we can materialize stores > via `filter`, `map` etc, so one of the main benefits of `through` no longer > exists. WDYT? > > Thanks, > Damian > > On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 at 18:17 Guozhang Wang wrot

Re: Kip Write Access

Hi Richard, It's done. Cheers. Guozhang On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Richard Yu wrote: > Hello, I wish to write a kip. Could you grant me access? > > Thanks > > (Wiki username is yohan.richard.yu) > -- -- Guozhang

Re: Please add me to contributor list

What's your apache id? On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:24 AM, 鄭紹志 wrote: > I want to work on some issue, please add me to contributor list in JIRA. > > Also need to write permission in Confluence. > > > Thanks ! > Vito > -- -- Guozhang

Re: Please add me to contributor list

It's done. Cheers. Guozhang On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 4:52 PM, 鄭紹志 wrote: > My id: vitojeng > > Thanks, Guozhang. > > > Vito > > > On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 11:39 AM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > > > What's your apache id? > > > > On Sat,

Re: 1.0.0 Feature Freeze Update

and fixes" > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Time+Based+Release+Plan > > So, minor KIPs can still be double committed after Wednesday. We should > only do that if we are confident that they won't cause stabilisation issues > though. > > Ismael >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-202

Thanks for the KIP, +1. If we can make it in 1.0.0, I think we can just remove the merge() in StreamsBuilder as it will only be introduced in 1.0.0; if we will add it in 1.1.0, then we indeed need to deprecate it. Guozhang On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Richard Yu wrote: > KIP-202 Move mer

Re: [Discuss] KIP-202 Move merge() from StreamsBuilder to KStream

I'd like to make an exception for this KIP if it's PR can get in before the the code freeze date, as it's a low risk small KIP that is unlikely to introduce regression. Guozhang On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Matthias J. Sax wrote: > @Damian, this KIP goes into 1.1 but not 1.0, so we need to

Re: [VOTE] 0.10.0.0 RC6

+1. Validated maven (should be https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/kafka/ btw) and binary libraries, quick start. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Harsha wrote: > +1 . Ran a 3-node cluster with few system tests on our side. Looks good. > > -Harsha > > On Thu, May 19,

Re: [DISCUSS] scalability limits in the coordinator

I like Jun's suggestion in changing the handling logics of single large message on the consumer side. As for the case of "a single group subscribing to 3000 topics", with 100 consumers the 2.5Mb Gzip size is reasonable to me (when storing in ZK, we also have the znode limit which is set to 1Mb by

Re: [DISCUSS] scalability limits in the coordinator

metadata for all topics is not great). > > Ismael > > On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > > > I like Jun's suggestion in changing the handling logics of single large > > message on the consumer side. > > > > As for the case of &quo

Re: [DISCUSS] scalability limits in the coordinator

gt; > > Assignment -> [TopicIndex [Partition]] > > > > You could even combine these two options so that you have only 3 integers > > for each topic assignment: > > > > Assignment -> [TopicIndex MinPartition MaxPartition] > > > > There may

Re: [DISCUSS] scalability limits in the coordinator

; > > > > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 4:05 PM, James Cheng > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On May 23, 2016, at 10:59 AM, Jason Gustafson < > > ja...@confluent.io> > > > > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

Hi Onur, Jason: Here are some thoughts about reusing process timeout as server-side rebalance timeout: First of all, my understanding is that 1) session timeout is for detecting consumer crash / hard failures (in this case the heartbeat thread will be dead as well, hence coordinator realized with

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

freedom to err on the high side when > setting process.timeout.ms, or even disable it entirely. They will have to > deal with rolling back any progress which cannot be committed after the > rebalance completes, but maybe this is less of a problem for some users? > > Thanks, > Jason &g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

oup > is regularly getting evicted, it would be a problem. So even if we expose > the rebalance timeout, the user is still going to have to set it with some > idea in mind about how long processing should take. > > Thanks, > Jason > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

> Now that I'm thinking about it more, I'm not sure this would be a great > > facility to depend on in practice. It might be OK if just one or two of > the > > consumers fall out of the group during the rebalance, but if half the > group > > is regularly getting

Re: KStreams Rewind Offset

Hello Michael, Just want to clarify a few thing before I can provide some suggestions in simplifying your pipeline with Kafka Streams: as for the "race condition between reading the stream data and the data being removed", do you mean that the stream records is actually mutable, hence after they a

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-54 Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy

verify the previous assignment are preserved. > But none of the methods seem to do these. Did I overlook them, or > stickiness is being tested in some other fashion? > > Also, if there is a high-level write-up about how this assignor works > could you please point me to it?

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-63: Unify store and downstream caching in streams

There are some details needed to be figured out if we go global: A KafkaStreams instance could have M threads, and each thread could various number (let's say N, but in practice it may be different from thread to thread) tasks, and each task contains a sub-topology with P caches (again in practice

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-63: Unify store and downstream caching in streams

al knowledge that you don't in this case, so there's no point in > pushing the decision to the user - he won't be able to make a better > decision. > > Gwen > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 10:44 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > There are some details needed to be figured

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-63: Unify store and downstream caching in streams

f the hash table lookup)? > > -Jay > > > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > There are some details needed to be figured out if we go global: > > > > A KafkaStreams instance could have M threads, and each thread could > various >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

Even with buffered or batch processing, I > would > > > usually expect flushing before a rebalance to take no more time than a > > > periodic flush. Otherwise, I'd probably try to see if there was some > > > workload I could push into periodic flushes so

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

hence if we are considering changing that now or in the future, we need to think through all the corner cases. So in general, I'd still prefer we reserve a third config for rebalance timeout in this KIP. Guozhang On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > (+ Matthias) &g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-33 - Add a time based log index

Thanks Jiangjie, I see the need for sensitive data purging, the above proposed change LGTM. One minor concern is that a wrongly marked timestamp on the first record could cause the segment to roll much later / earlier, though it may be rare. Guozhang On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Becket Qin

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-63: Unify store and downstream caching in streams

is in-memory. > > > > If we move this internal cache from RocksDBStore to a global place, I > hope > > we can reduces the time it needs to do the serialization. > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Ismael Juma wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-4 Create Topic Schema

Thanks Grant, the design proposal LGTM overall. One minor question about the error codes in CreateTopic Response, what are the possible values? I know this may be out of the scope of this KIP, but would also want to think about how producers should handle each one of them accordingly, especially i

Re: Memory consumption of Kafka-examples Kafka-streams around 1.5 GB

Hello Phillippe, I used to run the "SimpleBenchmark" on my laptop with 4GB also, and it usually used close to, but less than 1GB. https://www.codatlas.com/github.com/apache/kafka/HEAD/streams/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/streams/perf/SimpleBenchmark.java Note that I need to bootstrap a real ZK

Re: Complexe Event Processing on top of KafkaStreams

Hello Florian, Thanks for your interests! As mentioned in our release notes we are considering to add the SQL support (e.g. using Calcite) on top of Kafka Streams as a near-term future work. My own experience with CEP originates completely from a research project called "Cayuga" from my grad scho

Re: Embedding zookeeper and kafka in java process.

It seems "scala.MatchError: null" are not related to the settings that ZK and Kafka is embedded in the same process, and the only case that I can think of related is this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-940. Could you clarify if you start these two services on two processes, the issue

Re: [VOTE] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

＋1. On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:44 AM, Jason Gustafson wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like to open the vote for KIP-62. This proposal attempts to address one > of the recurring usability problems that users of the new consumer have > faced with as little impact as possible. You can read the full detail

Re: avro-console-producer issue for Kafka Stream example PageViewRegionLambdaExample

Here is my understanding about Avro "union type (or optional field if one of its union value is null)": 1. Even for such fields, you need to specify them as "null" in your data, such as {"region" : "US", "experience" : null}. 2. And if you do have a value for these union fields, you need to speci

Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8 as a minimum requirement

I think moving from Java 7 to 8 for Kafka Streams won't be of a big issue. What specific concerns do you have Jeff? On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Jeff Klukas wrote: > Would the move to Java 8 be for all modules? I'd have some concern about > removing Java 7 compatibility for kafka-clients and

Re: [VOTE] KIP-4 Create Topics Schema

+1. On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Ismael Juma wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Grant Henke wrote: > > > I would like to initiate the voting process for the "KIP-4 Create Topics > > Schema changes". This is not a vote for all of KIP-4, but specifically > for > > the

Re: Operator order

Hello Jeyhun, Another way to do this "dynamic routing" is to specify your topology using the lower-level processor API: http://docs.confluent.io/3.0.0/streams/developer-guide.html#processor-api More specifically, you can for example specify both A and D as parents of E when adding processor E, a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-62: Allow consumer to send heartbeats from a background thread

Hello Jun, Just clarifying, it will be using the max.poll.interval.ms config, in the wiki we use the term "process timeout" for it which exposed in the consumer configs as "max.poll.interval.ms". I have updated the wiki to make it more clear. Guozhang On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Jason Gust

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-4 Delete Topic Schema

Thanks Grant, looks good to me overall. One minor comment below: > - The error code in the response will either contain an argument > validation exception or a timeout exception. If you receive a timeout > exception, because you asked for 0 timeout, you can assume the message was

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-4 Delete Topic Schema

I see we have the similar setting for CreateTopic request timeout <= 0 as well, so maybe it has been discussed and I simply overlooked.. otherwise my question is for both of these cases. Guozhang On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks Grant, looks good to me o

Re: Possibly very minor typo in documentation.html

Thanks for reporting this Tyler, we will fix the docs. Guozhang On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Tyler wrote: > Note: Please CC me if needed, I am not subscribed to this list. > > 0.9 changes say: “Java 1.6 is no longer supported” > > However, the CWD in this example at > http://kafka.apache.o

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-4 Delete Topic Schema

side should be > fairly straight forward either way. > > I could be convinced otherwise, but I am leaning towards leaving it as is. > > Thanks, > Grant > > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > I see we have the similar setting fo

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

Hello Philippe, I think your question is really in two-folds: 1. What is the semantic difference between a KTable and a KStream, and more specifically how should we interpret (key, null) in KTable? You can find some explanations in this documentation: http://docs.confluent.io/3.0.0/streams/conce

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-54 Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy

Just adding some related reference here: Henry Cai is contributing some advanced feature in Kafka Streams regarding static assignment: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/1543 The main motivation is that when you do rolling bounce for upgrading your Kafka Streams code, for example, you would pre

Re: [VOTE] KIP-4 Delete Topics Schema

+1 On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Grant Henke wrote: > I would like to initiate the voting process for the "KIP-4 Delete Topics > Schema changes". This is not a vote for all of KIP-4, but specifically for > the delete topics changes. I have included the exact changes below for > clarity: > > >

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

nding on the set of > keys present in regionCounts1 if we view this > > from a functional programming point of view (it's as if we are > carrying garbage collected objects into regionCounts), which seems > natural considering the method filter that is pervasive in FP. >

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

27;t "create a deleted" key). > > Likewise cases 3 b,c look very reasonable. > > Just out of curiosity, did you effectively just restate the essence of > KIP-63 in a more approachable language I could understand or is KIP-63 > really a different beast? > >

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

followed up by you? I had the streams test suite pass aside for > a few cases that pertain specifically to this JIRA as assumptions have now > changed. > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Hi Philippe, > > > > Great, since you agree with m

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

nclude it into pull > request. If left to default value of false, I don't know what mechanism > should override it to true. > > Phil > > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 12:07 AM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > > > Thanks! You can follow this step-by-step guidance to contri

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

> Then I don't see any simple solution here at least for a novice, especially > since I don't know what can trigger the boolean flag to true. > On 27 Jun 2016 5:38 p.m., "Guozhang Wang" wrote: > > > My concern is that, the overhead of requesting the source KTable

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

r described > > case 3 to potentially desirable effect, but I didn't include it into pull > > request. If left to default value of false, I don't know what mechanism > > should override it to true. > > > > Phil > > > > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 1

Re: KTable.filter usage, memory consumption and materialized view semantics

; enter T2 at all (no null). Ultimately, the code change is simpler and the > test results look more intuitive. > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:55 PM, Philippe Derome > wrote: > > > good. > > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Guozhang Wang > wrote: > >

Re: KStream: KTable-KTable leftJoin with key only on RHS of join generates null in joined table

Hello, The KTable join semantics is not exactly the same with that of a RDBMS. You can fine detailed semantics in the web docs (search for Joining Streams): http://docs.confluent.io/3.0.0/streams/developer-guide.html#kafka-streams-dsl In a nutshell, the joiner will be triggered only if both / le

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Stream

Thanks Damian, the KIP wiki looks good to me. One minor comment on the "Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan" section: we probably also want to mentions that since we need to handle concurrent access with the queryable state support, this may incur slight overhead on the streams applicati

Re: [VOTE] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Streams

＋1 On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Damian Guy wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to initiate the voting process for KIP-67 > < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-67%3A+Queryable+state+for+Kafka+Streams > > > > KAFKA-3909 is the

Re: KStream: KTable-KTable leftJoin with key only on RHS of join generates null in joined table

a more egregious example where one table has billions of > keys and the other only a handful that would match but I'd assume that such > use cases could be natural. > > It seems to me that the null keys should be output to represent a record > deletion in the resulting table, but n

Re: [DISCUSS] Client Side Auto Topic Creation

I agree with Grant and Ismael regarding 1 / 2 / 3, and for 2) I would prefer having the default configs on the client side (i.e. like what we did in the kafka-topics script today) than on the cluster side, where the AdminClient will auto-set the configs if they are not specified by the user trigger

Kafka Clients page updated

Hello Kafka client folks, Since the kafka protocol has evolved multiple times since 0.1-0.7 to 0.10, and some clients have also updated themselves to support new protocol version, I have made a pass over the Kafka clients page: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Clients And sort

Re: [DISCUSS] Client Side Auto Topic Creation

I'd prefer to have the auto-creation on producer to false by default. Also, I would suggest not have a broker-side default configs for created topics, but rather on the admin-client side, this way users may be more aware of the default config values. Guozhang On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Is

Re: [VOTE] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Streams

t; >>> > > >> > > >>>> +1 (non-binding) > > >> > > >>>> > > >> > > >>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Damian Guy < > > >> damian@gmail.com> >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Streams

imilar to the previous > example: > > > > > > > > final KafkaStreams kafkaStreams = createKafkaStreams(); > > > > final Map> streamsMetadata = > > > kafkaStreams.allInstancesWithStore("word-count"); > > > > for(HostInfo hostInfo : stream

Re: [VOTE] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Streams

t() + ":" + > > >> streamsMetadata.port() + "/get/word-count/hello"); > > >> } > > >> > > >> > > >> The scatter/gather by store is fairly similar to the previous example: > > >> > > >> final Kafk

Re: [VOTE] KIP-67: Queryable state for Kafka Streams

Hi Damian, Since the StateStoreProvider is moved into internal packages, how about just keeping the ReadOnlyXXStores interface for the queryAPI, and "QueryableStoreType" in the discoverAPI, and move the StateStoreProvider / QueryableStoreTypeMatcher and different implementations of the matcher lik

Re: I had a problem of kerberos，I try to solve for a long time can not be resolved。Please help me！

Hi, >From the entry "ERROR SASL authentication failed using login context 'Client'." It seems your ZK cluster is guarded by SASL authentication mechanism, but your brokers which are talking to ZK are not "authenticated". Guozhang On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 12:06 PM, 無名 wrote: > HI, My Frends: >

Re: Can you add me to the contributors?

I have added you as apache id "mailtobuchi" to the list. Guozhang On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:11 PM, Buchi Reddy Busireddy < mailtobu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi awesome Kafka developers, > > I want to contribute to Kafka, starting with fixing a bug. As per the > contribution guidelines, I should be

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-70: Revise Partition Assignment Semantics on New Consumer's Subscription Change

This is a nice KIP write-up. LGTM too. Guozhang On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Dana Powers wrote: > This is a nice change. Great KIP write up. > > -Dana > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Vahid S Hashemian > wrote: > > Thanks Ismael. > > > > What do you think is the best way to check wit

Re: Kafka Streams for Remote Server

Misha, Did you pre-create the sink topic before starting your application or you are relying on the broker-side auto-create for that topic? If you are relying on auto-create, then there is a transient period where the topic is created but the metadata has not been propagated to the brokers so the

Re: Synchronized block in StreamTask

Hello Pierre, Thanks for pointing this out. Good question actually, I think it is safe to remove the synchronization block. Mind filing a one-liner PR? Guozhang On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Pierre Coquentin < pierre.coquen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I've a simple technical question abo

Re: JDK configuration for Kafka jobs in Jenkins

Thanks for the update Ismael. Guozhang On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:48 AM, Ismael Juma wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a quick update with regards to the JDK configuration for Kafka Jobs in > Jenkins. The Infra team has made some changes on how the JDK is installed > in Jenkins slaves and how it should b

Re: Kafka Streams for Remote Server

ages to this topic with the same exception. > Producing to other topics works well, so it seems like server problem? > > — Misha > > > On Jul 28, 2016, at 01:44, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > > Misha, > > > > Did you pre-create the sink topic before startin

Re: Request: Please add me to contributor list.

Done. Cheers. Guozhang On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 8:57 PM, chetan singh wrote: > Hello, > > Just trying to follow up on the request to add me to the contributor list. > Please let me know if more information is required. > > Chetan Singh > chetanjbsi...@gmail.com > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:11 AM

Re: [VOTE] KIP-70: Revise Partition Assignment Semantics on New Consumer's Subscription Change

+1. On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Jun Rao wrote: > Vahid, > > Thanks for the clear explanation in the KIP. +1 > > Jun > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Vahid S Hashemian < > vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > I would like to initiate the voting process for KIP-70 ( > > https://cwiki.a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-15 add a close with timeout to new producer

? I would understand > >> >throwing an error and failing immediately (fail fast) and I would > >> >understand logging an error and blocking for the time they specified > >> >(since > >> >that is what they asked for), but the logging an error and putativ

Re: Review Request 27391: Rebase patch and incorporate Joel's comments

r/27391/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Guozhang Wang

Re: Review Request 27391: Rebase patch and incorporate Joel's comments

://reviews.apache.org/r/27391/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Guozhang Wang

Re: Review Request 27391: Rebase patch and incorporate Joel's comments

/kafka/server/OffsetCommitTest.scala e4d0435eb4213597c2fb9c3f2093c227de53a417 core/src/test/scala/unit/kafka/server/ServerShutdownTest.scala b46daa436231d5aa5c1e2992fd5c2d9a73a30c80 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27391/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Guozhang Wang

Re: Review Request 27391: Rebase patch and incorporate Joel's comments

/kafka/server/ServerShutdownTest.scala b46daa436231d5aa5c1e2992fd5c2d9a73a30c80 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27391/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Guozhang Wang

Re: [DISCUSSION] Keep docs updated per jira

+1. I will update the protocol per KAFKA-1634. On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Jun Rao wrote: > Hi, Everyone, > > Quite a few jiras these days require documentation changes (e.g., wire > protocol, ZK layout, configs, jmx, etc). Historically, we have been > updating the documentation just before

Re: Review Request 31366: Patch for KAFKA-1461

> On March 24, 2015, 10:46 p.m., Guozhang Wang wrote: > > core/src/main/scala/kafka/server/AbstractFetcherThread.scala, lines 81-86 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/31366/diff/2/?file=898415#file898415line81> > > > > Jun has a comment about the case

Re: [DISCUSS] New partitioning for better load balancing

Gianmarco, I browse through your paper (congrats for the ICDE publication BTW!), and here are some questions / comments on the algorithm: 1. One motivation of enabling key-based partitioned in Kafka is to achieve per-key ordering, i.e. with all messages with the same key sent to the same partitio

Re: [KIP-DISCUSSION] KIP-13 Quotas

tion on quotas. > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > 3. Dynamic Configuration management - Being discussed > > in > > >> > > KIP-5. > > >> > > > >> > > Basically &g

Re: Review Request 31850: Patch for KAFKA-1660

so add [NOTE] for this? - Guozhang Wang On March 27, 2015, 11:35 p.m., Jiangjie Qin wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://re

Re: Review Request 31850: Patch for KAFKA-1660

/KafkaProducer.java <https://reviews.apache.org/r/31850/#comment128201> send -> previously sent - Guozhang Wang On March 27, 2015, 11:35 p.m., Jiangjie Qin wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To rep

Re: Review Request 31850: Patch for KAFKA-1660

> On April 7, 2015, 1:28 a.m., Joel Koshy wrote: > > clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/producer/internals/RecordAccumulator.java, > > line 362 > > > > > > As you explained offline, the sender does not hav

Re: Kafka confusion

This is great survey for understanding which part still needs improvement, thanks Gwen! On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > I was planning on doing a re-poll about a month after every release :) > > Maybe it can be part of the release activity. > > Gwen > > On Mon, Mar 30, 20

Re: [DISCUSS] New partitioning for better load balancing

pic B are completely independent in our > framework. > > Cheers, > > -- > Gianmarco > > On 7 April 2015 at 02:56, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Gianmarco, > > > > I browse through your paper (congrats for the ICDE publication BTW!), and > > here are s

Review Request 32931: Revert the changes in NoOffset error code

core/src/main/scala/kafka/common/ErrorMapping.scala eb1eb4a703098253d0aae79577084569177768d1 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/32931/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Guozhang Wang

Re: Review Request 31366: Patch for KAFKA-1461

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31366/#review79205 --- Ship it! LGTM, Jun do you want to take another look? - Guozhang

Re: Review Request 31568: Patch for KAFKA-1989

> On April 6, 2015, 10:35 p.m., Jun Rao wrote: > > core/src/main/scala/kafka/server/DelayedOperation.scala, lines 104-105 > > > > > > We probably should call forceComplete() first and only if it returns > > true, run

Re: Review Request 31568: Patch for KAFKA-1989

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31568/#review79263 --- - Guozhang Wang On April 7, 2015, 9:59 p.m., Yasuhiro Matsuda

Re: Review Request 31568: Patch for KAFKA-1989

/scala/kafka/utils/timer/TimingWheel.scala <https://reviews.apache.org/r/31568/#comment128498> We already check (overflowWheel == null) inside the function, hence it can be removed here. - Guozhang Wang On April 7, 2015, 9:59 p.m., Yasuhiro M

Re: Review Request 31568: Patch for KAFKA-1989

uture other delayed operations may do more work in onComplete() and hence taking time; we may want to extend it to multiple executor threads in the pool. - Guozhang Wang On April 7, 2015, 9:59 p.m., Yasuhiro Matsuda wrote: > > ---

Re: Review Request 31850: Patch for KAFKA-1660

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31850/#review79761 --- Ship it! - Guozhang Wang On April 10, 2015, 10:09 p.m., Jiangjie

Re: Review Request 31606: Patch for KAFKA-1416

> On March 25, 2015, 9:51 p.m., Guozhang Wang wrote: > > core/src/test/scala/unit/kafka/utils/TestUtils.scala, lines 761-773 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/31606/diff/2/?file=881937#file881937line761> > > > > Compression code is no longer used anymore, whi

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >