kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Stopford <...@confluent.io>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Vote for KIP-101 - Leader Epochs
Date Fri, 06 Jan 2017 09:32:00 GMT
Thanks Joel. I'll fix up the pics to make them consistent on nomenclature.

B

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:39 AM Joel Koshy <jjkoshy.w@gmail.com> wrote:

> (adding the dev list back - as it seems to have gotten dropped earlier in
> this thread)
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Joel Koshy <jjkoshy.w@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > This is a very well-written KIP!
> > Minor: there is still a mix of terms in the doc that references the
> > earlier LeaderGenerationRequest (which is what I'm assuming what it was
> > called in previous versions of the wiki). Same for the diagrams which I'm
> > guessing are a little harder to make consistent with the text.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Jun Rao <jun@confluent.io> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, Ben,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the updated KIP. +1
> >>
> >> 1) In OffsetForLeaderEpochResponse, start_offset probably should be
> >> end_offset since it's the end offset of that epoch.
> >> 3) That's fine. We can fix KAFKA-1120 separately.
> >>
> >> Jun
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Ben Stopford <ben@confluent.io> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Jun
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for raising these points. Thorough as ever!
> >> >
> >> > 1) Changes made as requested.
> >> > 2) Done.
> >> > 3) My plan for handing returning leaders is to simply to force the
> >> Leader
> >> > Epoch to increment if a leader returns. I don't plan to fix KAFKA-1120
> >> as
> >> > part of this KIP. It is really a separate issue with wider
> implications.
> >> > I'd be happy to add KAFKA-1120 into the release though if we have
> time.
> >> > 4) Agreed. Not sure exactly how that's going to play out, but I think
> >> we're
> >> > on the same page.
> >> >
> >> > Please could
> >> >
> >> > Cheers
> >> > B
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:50 AM Jun Rao <jun@confluent.io> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi, Ben,
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks for the proposal. Looks good overall. A few comments below.
> >> > >
> >> > > 1. For LeaderEpochRequest, we need to include topic right? We
> probably
> >> > want
> >> > > to follow other requests by nesting partition inside topic? For
> >> > > LeaderEpochResponse,
> >> > > do we need to return leader_epoch? I was thinking that we could just
> >> > return
> >> > > an end_offset, which is the next offset of the last message in the
> >> > > requested leader generation. Finally, would
> >> OffsetForLeaderEpochRequest
> >> > be
> >> > > a better name?
> >> > >
> >> > > 2. We should bump up both the produce request and the fetch request
> >> > > protocol version since both include the message set.
> >> > >
> >> > > 3. Extending LeaderEpoch to include Returning Leaders: To support
> >> this,
> >> > do
> >> > > you plan to use the approach that stores  CZXID in the broker
> >> > registration
> >> > > and including the CZXID of the leader in /brokers/topics/[topic]/
> >> > > partitions/[partitionId]/state in ZK?
> >> > >
> >> > > 4. Since there are a few other KIPs involving message format too,
it
> >> > would
> >> > > be useful to consider if we could combine the message format changes
> >> in
> >> > the
> >> > > same release.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > Jun
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Ben Stopford <ben@confluent.io>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi All
> >> > > >
> >> > > > We’re having some problems with this thread being subsumed
by the
> >> > > > [Discuss] thread. Hopefully this one will appear distinct. If
you
> >> see
> >> > > more
> >> > > > than one, please use this one.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > KIP-101 should now be ready for a vote. As a reminder the KIP
> >> proposes
> >> > a
> >> > > > change to the replication protocol to remove the potential for
> >> replicas
> >> > > to
> >> > > > diverge.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The KIP can be found here:  https://cwiki.apache.org/confl
> >> > > > uence/display/KAFKA/KIP-101+-+Alter+Replication+Protocol+to+
> >> > > > use+Leader+Epoch+rather+than+High+Watermark+for+Truncation <
> >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-101+-
> >> > > > +Alter+Replication+Protocol+to+use+Leader+Epoch+rather+
> >> > > > than+High+Watermark+for+Truncation>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Please let us know your vote.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > B
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

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