kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] KIP-171 - Extend Consumer Group Reset Offset for Stream Application
Date Thu, 22 Feb 2018 19:10:28 GMT
Just to clarify, the KIP itself has mentioned about the change so the PR
was not un-intentional:

"

3. Keep execution parameters uniform between both tools: It will execute by
default, and have a `dry-run` parameter just show the results. This will
involve change current `ConsumerGroupCommand` to change execution options.

"

We were agreed that the proposed change is better than the current status,
since may people not using "--execute" on consumer reset tool were actually
surprised that nothing gets executed. What we were concerning as a
hind-sight is that instead of doing such change in a minor release like
1.1, we should consider only doing that in the next major release as it
breaks compatibility. In the past when we are going to remove / replace
certain option we would first add a going-to-be-deprecated warning in the
previous releases until it was finally removed. So Jason's suggestion is to
do the same: we are not reverting this change forever, but trying to delay
it after 1.1.


Guozhang


On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Colin McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org> wrote:

> Perhaps, if the user doesn't pass the --execute flag, the tool should
> print a prompt like "would you like to perform this reset?" and wait for a
> Y / N (or yes or no) input from the command-line.  Then, if the --execute
> flag is passed, we skip this.  That seems 99% compatible, and also
> accomplishes the goal of making the tool less confusing.
>
> best,
> Colin
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018, at 10:23, Ismael Juma wrote:
> > Yes, let's revert the incompatible changes. There was no mention of
> > compatibility impact on the KIP and we should ensure that is the case for
> > 1.1.0.
> >
> > Ismael
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Jason Gustafson <jason@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I know it's a been a while since this vote passed, but I think we need
> to
> > > reconsider the incompatible changes to the consumer reset tool.
> > > Specifically, we have removed the --execute option without deprecating
> it
> > > first, and we have changed the default behavior to execute rather than
> do a
> > > dry run. The latter in particular seems dangerous since users who were
> > > previously using the default behavior to view offsets will now suddenly
> > > find the offsets already committed. As far as I can tell, this change
> was
> > > done mostly for cosmetic reasons. Without a compelling reason, I think
> we
> > > should err on the side of maintaining compatibility. At a minimum, if
> we
> > > really want to break compatibility, we should wait for the next major
> > > release.
> > >
> > > Note that I have submitted a patch to revert this change here:
> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4611.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Jason
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Jorge Esteban Quilcate Otoya <
> > > quilcate.jorge@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone for your feedback.
> > > >
> > > > KIP has been accepted and discussion is moved to PR.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Jorge.
> > > >
> > > > El lun., 6 nov. 2017 a las 17:31, Rajini Sivaram (<
> > > rajinisivaram@gmail.com
> > > > >)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > Thanks for the KIP,  Jorge.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Rajini
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Damian Guy <damian.guy@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the KIP - +1 (binding)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 at 18:39 Guozhang Wang <wangguoz@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks Jorge for driving this KIP! +1 (binding).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Guozhang
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Bill Bejeck <
> bbejeck@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Bill
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Matthias J.
Sax <
> > > > > > > matthias@confluent.io>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 9/11/17 3:04 PM, Jorge Esteban Quilcate
Otoya wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It seems that there is no further concern
with the
> KIP-171.
> > > > > > > > > > > At this point we would like to start
the voting
> process.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The KIP can be found here:
> > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > > > > > > > > 171+-+Extend+Consumer+Group+Reset+Offset+for+Stream+
> > > > Application
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > -- Guozhang
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>



-- 
-- Guozhang

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