Need Help regarding Jenkins buil

can I have this PR being reviewed by someone? Thanks! Sagar.

Re: Kafka Consumer manual partition assignment

Hi, Any help here would be highly appreciated :) Sagar. On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 at 07:53, Sagar <sagarmeansoc...@gmail.com> wrote: > We have a use case where in we want to assign partitions manually for a > set of topics to allow fine grained control of the records we are fetching. &

Question Kafka Reassign partitions tool

there a way I can still do this operation by getting leader for a partition first, then adding it to the replica list and then building the json dynamically? Thanks! Sagar.

Re: Question Kafka Reassign partitions tool

is stored in zookeeper? If yes, then can I probably use that get the current json and then build the json which can be fed to the tool. I tried to search using the zk shell but couldn't find... Sagar. On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Todd Palino <tpal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Preferre

Kafka Consumer manual partition assignment

ECS for running our consumers so target group would spin up a new consumer based upon health checks. Any examples + guidelines around this would be highly appreciated. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: Question Kafka Reassign partitions tool

the first entry in that list, basically to keep the preferred replica logic intact. Thanks for the help. Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Todd Palino <tpal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, the replicas are stored in Zookeeper, so you can iterate over the > information th

Question Regarding seek() in KafkaConsumer

this way? If I want to reliably retry then what patterns should be used? Couple of other approaches I read in Kafka definitive gide were to push the retriable records to a buffer or to a separate topic. So, are those the correct ways of retrying and not this? Thanks! Sagar.

Re: Kafka Connect

Hi meirkhan, You can give debezium a shot. It has a connector for mongodb On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 6:56 PM, wrote: > Hello Kafka! > > Here is my case. I need the Kafka Connector to Mongodb which imitates JDBC > Source Connector. > So that data is loaded to Kafka by periodically executing a

KAFKA-8238

Hi all, I would like to start contributing to the Kafka project. I looked at the newbie tickets and thought I could start with this:(?) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8238 Or if there's anything else that I can look at, please let me know. Sagar.

Permission to create KIP

Hi, I have done some work on adding prefix scan for state store and would like to create a KIP for the same. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: Permission to create KIP

Hi, Its sagarmeansocean On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 12:29 AM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > What is your wiki account id? > > > -Matthias > > On 12/27/19 7:12 AM, Sagar wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have done some work on adding prefix scan for state store and would >

[DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi All, I would like to start a discussion on the KIP that I created below to add prefix scan support in State Stores: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-614%3A+Add+Prefix+Scan+support+for+State+Stores Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

, Thanks for bringing that point up! I have mentioned about that PR in the KIP under a section called Other considerations. Nonetheless, thanks for pointing it out! Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:17 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Not to derail this KIP discussion, but to leave a

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi John, Thank you! I have marked the KIP as Accepted :) Regarding the point on InMemoryKeyValueStore, in the PR I had added the implementation for InMemoryKeyValueStore as well. I hadn't mentioned about it in the KIP which I have done now as you suggested. Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Sep 3, 2020

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Thanks All! I see 3 binding +1 votes and 2 non-binding +1s. Does it mean this KIP has gained a lazy majority? Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 6:51 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks for the KIP Sagar. I'm +1 (binding) too. > > > Guozhang > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 1

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi All, Bumping the thread again ! Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:08 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Thanks Sagar! +1 (non-binding) > > Sophie > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 11:37 PM Sagar wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Just thought of bumping this

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Thanks Guozhang, For the PR review, the PR is already there in the KIP. I am adding it here: https://github.com/confluentinc/kafka/pull/242 It's not complete by any means but maybe one pass would be possible? Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:26 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hey Sa

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi All, Just wanted to know, what the next steps are wrt to the KIP? Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 10:17 PM Sagar wrote: > Hi John, > > Thank you! I have marked the KIP as Accepted :) > > Regarding the point on InMemoryKeyValueStore, in the PR I had added the &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

the type definition of types I will try and think about some alternatives and share if I get any. Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 1:55 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Thanks for the response. Your use case makes sense to me; I figured it > must be so

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

for searching . Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 11:42 AM Sagar wrote: > Hi John, > > Thank you. I think it makes sense to modify the KIP to add the > prefixScan() as part of the existing interfaces and add the new mixin > behaviour as Rejected alternatives. I am not very aware

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

was really insightful and it's always good to learn/discover new things :) Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 7:37 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi, Sagar! > > Thanks for this KIP. I'm sorry it took me so long to reply. I'll number my > points differently to avoid confusion. > > I

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi All, Bumping this thread to see if there are any feedbacks. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 9:49 AM John Roesler wrote: > Thanks for the KIP, Sagar! > > I’m +1 (binding) > > -John > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020, at 02:05, Sagar wrote: > > Hi All, > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi All, Just thought of bumping this voting thread again to see if we can form any consensus around this. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:21 AM Adam Bellemare wrote: > LGTM > +1 non-binding > > On Sun, Jul 19, 2020 at 4:13 AM Sagar wrote: > > > Hi All, > &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi John, Thanks, I have updated the KIP. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 12:00 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Sorry for the ambiguity. You could just mention it in the Public > Interfaces section. Or, if you want to be more specific, you can show it in > the me

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi John, I have updated the KIP with all the new changes we discussed in this discussion thread. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-614%3A+Add+Prefix+Scan+support+for+State+Stores Request you to go through the same. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 8:09 AM John

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Hi John, Thank you! Question on the comment, where should I add the default implementation? I guess that needs to be added in the Proposal Section of the kIP. Thanks! Sagar. On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 11:46 PM John Roesler wrote: > Thanks Sagar, > > That looks good to me! The only mino

[VOTE] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

can+support+for+State+Stores> Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

Thanks John, Sorry I’m new to this process.  does it mean I start a voting email? Pardon my ignorance. Sagar. On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 8:06 PM, John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Thanks for the update. As far as I’m concerned, I’m ready to vote now. > > Thanks, > John

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

or should I move it to ReadOnlyKeyValueStore where even the range query resides? Regarding the 2 notes on UnsupportedOperationException and changing the name to prefixScan, i will incorporate both of them into the KIP. Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 11:55 PM John Roesler wrote: > W

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

, it would be great if you can provide some feedback on this. Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 9:21 AM Sagar wrote: > Hi John, > > You rightly pointed out, the devil is in the detail :). I will start with > the implementation to get a sense. > > Here are my thoughts on

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

/commands/scan#the-match-option Typically Redis works with Binary Safe strings so the prefix key type and the actual keys are of the same type. Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:41 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Thanks for the reply. I agree that your UUID example il

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-614: Add Prefix Scan support for State Stores

sense, I can modify my PR to go along these lines. Please let me know what you think. Lastly, I didn't understand this line of yours: *It might help if there are other typed key/value stores to compare APIs with.* Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 6:03 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sa

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Thanks Sophie, Most of these changes should be there in my PR. I will wait for a couple of days into next week to see if concerns are raised. Thanks! Sagar. On Sat, Apr 24, 2021 at 1:07 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Thanks Sagar, these changes make sense to me. I don't think we need to c

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Thanks John! Yeah I think window.inner.class.deserializer sounds good. Your thoughts @Sophie? Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 5:23 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > I think this is a good proposal. > > The only change I might recommend is to change the config

Re: [DISCUSS] Please review 2.8.0 blog post

Hi, I am not sure if others are experiencing it, but when I click on the Release notes link provided on the page, it keeps throwing 404: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/kafka/2.8.0/RELEASE_NOTES.html Not sure if its an issue but thought I will call it out :D Thanks! Sagar. On Mon

Re: [DISCUSS] Please review 2.8.0 blog post

Got it, Thanks for the explanation John! Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 8:16 AM John Roesler wrote: > Oh, my apologies, Sagar, > > That link will not resolve until the release. The release > notes that I prepared as part of the RC are available here: > https://home.apach

[VOTE] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Hi All, I would like to start voting on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=177047930 Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Thanks Leah/Sophie. I have updated the KIP with the new config. Do you think we can proceed with the voting process for the KIP or should we wait a bit longer? Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 11:59 PM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Yeah sure, window.inner.class.deserializer sounds g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Make the CooperativeStickyAssignor as the default assignor

Thank you ! Sagar. On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 2:21 PM, Luke Chen wrote: > Hi Sagar, > No problem. I changed my KIP to KIP-726, and also added your KIP into the > KIP list table. > > I'll send another discussion mail later for KIP-726. > > Thanks > Luke > > On Fri,

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Hi Sophie, Thanks for the feedback! I have updated the KIP inline with whatever you suggested. Regarding point 5, I have added the note as it makes sense to not set the config via the KafkaStreams app. Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 7:52 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Hey Sa

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Make the CooperativeStickyAssignor as the default assignor

number or would you it? Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 12:53 PM Luke Chen wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'd like to discuss the following proposal to make the > CooperativeStickyAssignor as the default assignor. > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/

[DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Hi All, I would like to start a discussion on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=177047930 Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [VOTE] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Thanks Sophie/ John/ Leah and Guozhang. Can I assume that this kip has received sufficient votes to be marked as accepted ? Sagar. On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 at 9:38 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > +1. Thanks! > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 7:01 AM Leah Thomas > wrote: > > > Hi Sagar, +

Re: [VOTE] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Thanks for the very precise time John :D I think that time has been passed so I am going to close the voting. Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 12:28 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > It does have three binding votes, but it looks like it's a > little shy of the mandat

Re: [VOTE] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

Hi All, This KIP has been accepted with 3 binding votes and 1 non-binding. Closing the voting now. Thanks everyone! Sagar. On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 9:02 AM Sagar wrote: > Thanks for the very precise time John :D > > I think that time has been passed so I am going to close t

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-725: Streamlining configurations for TimeWindowedDeserializer.

eed a new vote for these so please let me know! Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 7:55 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > I think you can start the vote, we can always return to the discussion if > someone raises a > concern during voting. > > Anyways I think/hope this won't be

[DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, I would like to start a discussion on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186878390 Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

the current totally aggregated metrics, * you mean the bytes aggregated at a task level? 4) I am ok with the name change, but would like to know others' thoughts. Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 11:54 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks Sagar for writing this PR. > > I think tw

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

. Lastly, importance would also. be added. I guess Medium should be ok. Thanks! Sagar. On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 10:42 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > 1) I agree that we should just distribute the bytes evenly, at least for > now. It's simpler to understand and > we can always change

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Thanks Guozhang and Luke. I have updated the KIP with all the suggested changes. Do you think we could start voting for this? Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 8:26 AM Luke Chen wrote: > Thanks for the KIP. Overall LGTM. > > Just one thought, if we "rename"

Re: [VOTE] KIP-773 Differentiate consistently metric latency measured in millis and nanos

Looks good to me. +1(non-binding) Sagar. On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 at 8:15 AM, Luke Chen wrote: > Thanks for the KIP. > > +1 (non-binding) > > Thanks. > Luke > > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 10:32 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Thanks Josep, > > > > Took a

[VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, I would like to start a vote on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186878390 Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi Mathias, I missed out on the metrics part. I have added the new metric in the proposed changes section along with the small re-wording that you talked about. Let me know if that makes sense. Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 3:45 AM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > Thanks for the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi Guozhang, Thanks, I have updated the KIP with the mentioned changes. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 3:45 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Thanks for the added metrics, about its name, if it is proposed as a > task-level config, then we do not need to prefix its n

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, Bumping this vote thread again! Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 1:19 PM Luke Chen wrote: > Thanks for the KIP. > > + 1 (non-binding) > > Thanks. > Luke > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 2:48 PM Josep Prat > wrote: > > > +1 (non bindin

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

We have 3 binding votes: Sophie/Guozhang/Mathias and 2 non-binding votes: Josep/Luke and no -1 votes. Marking this KIP as accepted. Thanks everyone! Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 7:18 AM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On 9/28/21 10:40 AM, Sagar wrote: &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, Bumping this thread again. Thanks! Sagar. On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 2:04 PM Sagar wrote: > Hi Mathias, > > I missed out on the metrics part. > > I have added the new metric in the proposed changes section along with the > small re-wording that you talked abou

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-776: Add Consumer#peek for debugging/tuning

iately if there are no records available or exception thrown. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:22 AM Boyang Chen wrote: > Thanks Luke for the KIP. > > I think I understand the motivation is to avoid affecting offset positions > of the records, but the feature could be easily re

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-796: Interactive Query v2

for the same KeyQuery? Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:20 PM Patrick Stuedi wrote: > Hi John, > > Thanks for submitting the KIP! One question I have is, assuming one > instantiates InteractiveQueryRequest via withQuery, and then later calls > getPositionBound, what will the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-796: Interactive Query v2

, is there going to be any impact on remote state store querying capabilities? Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 4:22 AM John Roesler wrote: > Hi Patrick and Sagar, > > Thanks for the feedback! I'll just break out the questions > and address them one at a time. > > Patric

Re: [VOTE] KIP-811: Add config min.repartition.purge.interval.ms to Kafka Streams

of them is very high as compared to the other. Let me know what you think. Other than that, Im +1 (non-binding). Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 6:17 PM Luke Chen wrote: > Hi Nick, > > Thanks for the KIP! > +1 (non-binding) > > Luke > > On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Thanks Guozhang. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 7:40 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Looks good to define it in the NamedCacheMetrics. Though since this is an > internal implementation detail and neither of the classes are public, we do > not actually

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, There's another amendment proposed for this KIP. We are adding a new metric type called *cache-size-bytes-total *to capture the cache size in bytes accumulated by a task. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186878390 Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Jan 24, 2022

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

. Thanks! Sagar. On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 1:14 PM Sagar wrote: > Hi All, > > There's another amendment proposed for this KIP. We are adding a new > metric type called *cache-size-bytes-total *to capture the cache size in > bytes accumulated by a task. > > https://cwiki.apache

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Actually @Guozhang, I just realised I didn't frame my question properly. What I wanted to know what, should this be a task-level metric or a cache-level metric. Place of definition is one thing, but what kind of metric should it be is what I wanted to know. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Feb 14, 2022

[DISCUSS] KIP-818: Introduce cache-size-bytes-total Task Level Metric

Hi All, I would like to open a discussion thread on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=186878390 PS: This is about introducing a new metric and I am assuming that it requires a KIP. If that isn't the case, I can close it. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-818: Introduce cache-size-bytes-total Task Level Metric

help people to infer this. Also, thanks for the explanation Guozhang on why this should be a task level metric. What are your thoughts on this @Sophie? Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 4:47 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks Sagar for proposing the KIP, and Sophie for sharing your thoug

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-818: Introduce cache-size-bytes-total Task Level Metric

Hi All, As discussed above, this KIP would be discarded and the new metric proposed here would be added to KIP-770 as the need to add a new metric was discovered when working on it. Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 9:54 AM Sagar wrote: > Hi Guozhang, > > Sure. I will add it t

Re: [DISCUSS] Should we automatically close stale PRs?

, any stale/unused PRs can be closed straight away thereby reducing the load on reviewers. I have done some work on kubernetes open source and they follow a similar paradigm which is useful. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-818: Introduce cache-size-bytes-total Task Level Metric

Hi Guozhang, Sure. I will add it to the KIP. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 6:22 AM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Since the PR is reopened and we are going to re-merged the fixed PRs, what > about just adding that as part of the KIP as the addendum? > > On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Luke Chen

Congrats Luke! Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 8:12 AM deng ziming wrote: > Congratulations, Luke! > > Thanks, > Ziming Deng > > > On Feb 10, 2022, at 9:39 AM, John Roesler wrote: > > > > Congratulations, Luke! > > -John > > > > O

Re: [VOTE] KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" with "input.buffer.max.bytes"

Hi All, There is a small update to the KIP whereby the newly introduced metric *total-bytes *has been renamed to *input-buffer-bytes-total.* Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 9:57 AM Sagar wrote: > We have 3 binding votes: Sophie/Guozhang/Mathias > and 2 non-binding votes: Jose

Re: KIP-976: Cluster-wide dynamic log adjustment for Kafka Connect

to the default case. 4) I had the same question as Yash regarding persistent cluster-wide logging level. I think you have explained it well and we can skip it for now. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Sep 5, 2023 at 8:49 PM Chris Egerton wrote: > Hi all, > > Thank you so much for the generous review commen

Re: [VOTE] KIP-953: partition method to be overloaded to accept headers as well.

, checking out the AdminClient APIs examples provided by Ismael will give you more context. Let me know what you think. Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 12:49 PM Jack Tomy wrote: > Hey everyone, > > As I see devs favouring the current style of implementation, and that is > inline w

Re: KIP-976: Cluster-wide dynamic log adjustment for Kafka Connect

invoking scope=worker endpoint n times to reflect on n workers so maybe not a necessary change. But this could be useful on a large cluster. Do you think this is worth listing in the Future Work section? It's not important so can be ignored as well. Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 12:08 A

Re: [VOTE] KIP-910: Update Source offsets for Source Connectors without producing records

Hi All, Based on the latest discussion thread, it appears as if all open questions have been answered. Hopefully now we are in a state where we can close out on the Voting process. Thanks everyone for the great feedback. Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 9:00 AM Sagar wrote: > Hi

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-910: Update Source offsets for Source Connectors without producing records

. Thanks Yash for closing out on this one! Hopefully all open questions have now been addressed. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 3:33 PM Yash Mayya wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > > The size of offsets topic can be controlled by > > setting appropriate topi

Re: KIP-976: Cluster-wide dynamic log adjustment for Kafka Connect

vities per worker on a subset of them using finer grained logs. I am not sure if it's a strong enough motivation but as I said it just felt like a useful extension. I will leave it to you if you want to add it or not (I am ok either way). Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:26 PM Chris Eger

Re: Disabling Test: org.apache.kafka.trogdor.coordinator.CoordinatorTest.testTaskRequestWithOldStartMsGetsUpdated()

Hey Greg, Aah ok, I wasn't aware there existed a JIRA for this already. I did see your attempt to fix this but it seems to be failing still. Sagar. On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 10:30 PM Greg Harris wrote: > Hey Sagar, > > The JIRA for this flaky test is here: > https://issues.apa

Re: [VOTE] KIP-970: Deprecate and remove Connect's redundant task configurations endpoint

+1 (non - binding). Thanks ! Sagar. On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 11:09 PM, Chris Egerton wrote: > +1 (binding), thanks Yash! > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 1:34 PM Andrew Schofield < > andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for the KIP. Looks good to

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-987: Connect Static Assignments

d above should cover all cases, but I still do agree to the fact that setting the selector config value at a task level is a challenge. Thanks! Sagar. On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 10:43 PM Greg Harris wrote: > Hey Hector, > > That's a cool idea for the ConnectAssignor plugin. > >

Re: Security for Kafka

Hey Walchester, There's a confluent community slack Workspace having a #security channel where you can post your question. Also, have you filed a bug in AK JIRA which can also help you get the traction of some of the community members who have expertise in this area. Thanks! Sagar. On Thu, Oct

Re: [VOTE] 3.6.0 RC0

to this). Would like to hear others' thoughts as well. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 3:14 PM Satish Duggana wrote: > Hi Greg, > Thanks for reporting the KafkaConnect issue. I replied to this issue > on "Apache Kafka 3.6.0 release" email thread and on > https://

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Lucas Brutschy

Congrats Lucas ! On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 at 9:15 PM, Bruno Cadonna wrote: > Hi all, > > The PMC of Apache Kafka is pleased to announce a new Kafka committer > Lucas Brutschy. > > Lucas' major contributions are around Kafka Streams. > > Lucas' significantly contributed to the state updater >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Yash Mayya

Congrats Yash ! On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 at 9:38 PM, Ashwin wrote: > Awesome ! Congratulations Yash !! > > On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 9:25 PM Edoardo Comar > wrote: > > > Congratulations Yash > > > > On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 16:28, Bruno Cadonna wrote: > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The PMC of Apache

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-987: Connect Static Assignments

elays? Maybe this has been explained in the KIP but it wasn't clear to me when I read it. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 11:22 PM Greg Harris wrote: > Hi Mickael, > > I'm not Chris but I hope I can still respond to your questions :) > > 1a. This system behaves best when con

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-970: Deprecate and remove Connect's redundant task configurations endpoint

Thanks Yash. LGTM Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 6:04 PM Chris Egerton wrote: > Hi Yash, > > Thanks for driving this, and for putting out a well-written KIP. LGTM! > > Cheers, > > Chris > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 6:13 AM Yash Mayya wrote: > > &g

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-943: Add independent "offset.storage.segment.bytes" for connect-distributed.properties

of a Point of view(or even a potential fix) on this before we go about implementing this change. WDYT? Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 6:09 PM hudeqi <16120...@bjtu.edu.cn> wrote: > bump this discuss thread. > > best, > hudeqi > > hudeqi 16120...@bjtu.edu.cn写道： > &g

Re: [VOTE] KIP-910: Update Source offsets for Source Connectors without producing records

Hi All, Bumping the voting thread again. Thanks! Sagar. On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:43 PM Sagar wrote: > Attaching the KIP link for reference: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-910%3A+Update+Source+offsets+for+Source+Connectors+without+producing+records > > Tha

Re: [VOTE] KIP-953: partition method to be overloaded to accept headers as well.

ion method expects serialized keys and values while ProducerRecord doesn't have access to those (It directly operates on K, V). Thanks! Sagar. On Sun, Aug 27, 2023 at 8:51 AM Ismael Juma wrote: > A more concrete question: did we consider having the method `partition` > take `ProduceRecor

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-910: Update Source offsets for Source Connectors without producing records

n here we could argue that since it's sending the partition/offsets it can do the tracking on it's own, but IMO that is too much work given that the information is already available via offsets to be committed. Thanks! Sagar.

Disabling Test: org.apache.kafka.trogdor.coordinator.CoordinatorTest.testTaskRequestWithOldStartMsGetsUpdated()

know if disabling it doesn't sound like a good idea. Thanks! Sagar.

[DISCUSS] KIP-837 Allow MultiCasting a Result Record.

Hi All, I would like to open a discussion thread on https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=211883356. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [VOTE] KIP-843: Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics

the metric already exists and that's why I still think getOrCreateMetric still signifies the action correctly. Or how about addOrGetMetric or getOrAddMetric, just replacing create with add to keep it similar to the already present addMetric method. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 1:19 AM Ismael

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-843 Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics.

if that's ok. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 8:40 AM Luke Chen wrote: > Hi Sagar, > > Thanks for the KIP. > In the `Compatibility` section, you mentioned: > > *The changes are backward compatible and needs no deprecation/migration.* > > But as

[VOTE] KIP-837 Allow MultiCasting a Result Record.

Hi All, I would like to start a voting thread on https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=211883356. I am just starting this as the discussion thread has been open for 10+ days. In case there are some comments, we can always discuss them over there. Thanks! Sagar.

Re: [VOTE] KIP-843: Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics

Oh yeah there's another metric function which is get-only. I think we should go ahead with getOrCreateMetric. Thanks! Sagar. On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:02 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > I'd prefer the getOrCreateMetric function name, since for the existing " > sensor(String name

Re: [DISCUSS] Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics.

Hi All, Plz ignore this email as it doesn't have the KIP number. I sent another email with the updated subject name. Thanks! Sagar. On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 6:03 PM Sagar wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to start a discussion on the following KIP: > https://cwiki.apache.org/conflu

[DISCUSS] KIP-843 Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics.

and ignore the other one. Sorry about the spamming. Thanks! Sagar.

[DISCUSS] Adding metricOrElseCreate method to Metrics.

Hi All, I would like to start a discussion on the following KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-843%3A+Adding+metricOrElseCreate+method+to+Metrics Thanks! Sagar.

  1   2   3   >