Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

6:07 AM To: dev Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request Hi, I'm late to the discussion, so apologies. One question, did we consider having the client generate a member id in the first join group? This could be random or known to be unique and would avoid a s

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

Hi, I'm late to the discussion, so apologies. One question, did we consider having the client generate a member id in the first join group? This could be random or known to be unique and would avoid a second join group request in the common case. If we considered and rejected this option, it

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

m: Boyang Chen > > Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 10:53 AM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group > > request > > > > Thanks Jason for the reply! Since the overall motivation and design is >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

> From: Boyang Chen > Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 10:53 AM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group > request > > Thanks Jason for the reply! Since the overall motivation and design is > pretty

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

J. Sax Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 3:12 AM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request SGTM. On 11/30/18 10:17 AM, Jason Gustafson wrote: > Using the session expiration logic we already have seems like the simplest

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request SGTM. On 11/30/18 10:17 AM, Jason Gustafson wrote: > Using the session expiration logic we already have seems like the simplest > option (this is probably a one or two line change). The

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

Matthias J. Sax >> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 10:26 AM >> To: dev@kafka.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group >> request >> >> Thanks! Makes sense. >> >> I missed that fact, that the `member.id`

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

data map. > > > > Does this sound clear to you? > > > > Best, > > Boyang > > > > From: Stanislav Kozlovski > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 7:39 PM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

. From: Matthias J. Sax Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 10:26 AM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request Thanks! Makes sense. I missed that fact, that the `member.id` is added on the second joinGroup

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

t; By then broker will include c2 within the broker metadata map. > > Does this sound clear to you? > > Best, > Boyang > > From: Stanislav Kozlovski > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 7:39 PM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

ate `group.initial.rebalance.delay.ms`. > Also one round trip > > shouldn't increase the latency too much IMO. > > > > Best, > > Boyang > > > > From: Stanislav Kozlovski > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 2:32 AM > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

ms`. > Also one round trip > > shouldn't increase the latency too much IMO. > > > > Best, > > Boyang > > > > From: Stanislav Kozlovski > > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 2:32 AM > > To: dev@kafka.apache.org &

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

nitial.rebalance.delay.ms`. Also > one round trip > shouldn't increase the latency too much IMO. > > Best, > Boyang > ____________________ > From: Stanislav Kozlovski > Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 2:32 AM > To: dev@kafka.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require membe

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

up.initial.rebalance.delay.ms`. Also one round trip shouldn't increase the latency too much IMO. Best, Boyang From: Stanislav Kozlovski Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 2:32 AM To: dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for i

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

Hi Boyang, The KIP looks very good. One small question I have is now that we have one and a half round-trips needed to join in a rebalance (1 full RT addition), is it worth it to consider increasing the default value of `group.initial.rebalance.delay.ms`? Best, Stanislav On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-394: Require member.id for initial join group request

Hi Boyang, Thanks for the KIP. Looks good overall. I think we will need to bump the version of the JoinGroup protocol in order to indicate compatibility with the new behavior. The coordinator needs to know when it is safe to assume the client will handle the error code. Also, I was wondering if