kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-108: Create Topic Policy
Date Mon, 09 Jan 2017 18:42:25 GMT
Hi Roger,

That's a good question. The server defaults are passed via the `configure`
method of the `Configurable` interface that is implemented by
`CreateTopicPolicy`. I'll mention this explicitly in the KIP.

Ismael

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Roger Hoover <roger.hoover@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is great.  Thanks, Ismael.
>
> One question.  When TopicDetails are passed to the policy implementation,
> would the server defaults already have been merged?  If not, I think the
> policy also needs access to the server defaults.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Roger
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Ismael Juma <ismael@juma.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the review Jun. Yes, that's a good point, I have updated the
> > KIP.
> >
> > Ismael
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Jun Rao <jun@confluent.io> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Ismael,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the KIP. Looks reasonable to me. To be consistent with the
> > > pattern used in other pluggable interfaces, we probably should make the
> > new
> > > interface configurable and closable?
> > >
> > > Jun
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 4:16 AM, Ismael Juma <ismael@juma.me.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Dan and Colin for the feedback. I updated the KIP to include
> the
> > > > addition of a validation mode. Since we need to bump the protocol
> > version
> > > > for that, I also added an error message per topic to the response. I
> > had
> > > > the latter as "Future Work", but I actually felt that it should be in
> > the
> > > > first version (good to have feedback confirming that).
> > > >
> > > > Let me know if the changes look good to you.
> > > >
> > > > Ismael
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Colin McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yeah, I agree... having a validation mode would be nice.  We should
> > be
> > > > > explicit that passing validation doesn't 100% guarantee that a
> > > > > subsequent call to create the topic will succeed, though.  There
is
> > an
> > > > > obvious race condition there-- for example, with a plugin which
> > > consults
> > > > > some external authentication system, there could be a change to the
> > > > > privileges in between validation and attempted creation.
> > > > >
> > > > > It also seems like we should try to provide a helpful exception
> > message
> > > > > for the cases where topic creation fails.  This might involve
> adding
> > > > > more detail about error conditions to CreateTopicsRequest... right
> > now
> > > > > it just returns an error code, but a text message would be a nice
> > > > > addition.
> > > > >
> > > > > cheers,
> > > > > Colin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017, at 13:41, dan wrote:
> > > > > > it would be nice to have a dry-run or validate ability added
to
> > this
> > > > kip.
> > > > > > since we are offloading validation to a 3rd party implementor
a
> > > random
> > > > > > user
> > > > > > can't know a priori (based solely on kafka configs) whether
a
> call
> > > > should
> > > > > > succeed without actually creating the topic.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > a similar case is in connect where there is a separate endpoint
> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/trunk/connect/
> > > > > runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/connect/runtime/rest/
> > resources/
> > > > > ConnectorPluginsResource.java#L49-L58>
> > > > > > to attempt to validate a connect configuration without actually
> > > > creating
> > > > > > the connector.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks
> > > > > > dan
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Ismael Juma <ismael@juma.me.uk>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We've posted "KIP-108: Create Topic Policy" for discussion:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > > > > > 108%3A+Create+Topic+Policy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please take a look. Your feedback is appreciated.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message