From dev-return-105160-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@kafka.apache.org Thu Jun 20 23:24:52 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [207.244.88.153]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 21FC5180670 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2019 01:24:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 70488 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jun 2019 23:24:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@kafka.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@kafka.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@kafka.apache.org Received: (qmail 70472 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jun 2019 23:24:49 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 23:24:49 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8E042C0B60 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 23:24:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.8 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UMf5L-lT0NTz for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 23:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oi1-f182.google.com (mail-oi1-f182.google.com [209.85.167.182]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 70CE45F178 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 23:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oi1-f182.google.com with SMTP id w7so3408884oic.3 for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:24:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=wniEji2N8y14AGgxjy7xfjBytI8tt5lt63nG+/1Sk58=; b=BuHLZEbJm0XiEm7KnNBamPb3YKIn8sJ1LNjx9J2RjCe3NtT3ZTfVBJDikW1LGP70W6 psKXGOLvMaJetkI1Mv8XSZXHP8C2JCO/k2dtKZGyvR3JgBv638ALnSHetuLQ9EqZh866 yxvKQIcsH/jbNJgiq//xyQI/h7iOwUFKtD3djQqjuOik51pLxvRwjzAbkakKYxk147Du sGfexmprqwUqNFCi0DQd1Xnp+hqoiz3bRIZu0SS8EAhPSk5SJx9W3dfINbpnzB/NpdVE HEc9Z3QYg0YbriiorrCbebDlcMq7I/OryG5z0+M3ZBongi3dK32ATSJv+gak5X0flguq AkDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=wniEji2N8y14AGgxjy7xfjBytI8tt5lt63nG+/1Sk58=; b=WRntILauntFSLdh26yDSehuxT3ANv/h111M2+9OFFjtTLrUKvoa+iNaM3jD570xuQp Dh68WeMbGT0Mxl3sYxrSWtpE50VLNKnbrr7/feyYHVX1CKcdnNJVMFGL9RxlXnCLNIhQ YrP6I3aAT56GMA/Q4xF/y0/HeZtPngw0CVXYKQj+Uvwi6m7FNI0RZ3SbWJcON+Cbtsnl YIAt1lSxOO5wbUNEDecHV3cTI0F3OZ8lMZbKFnwo99cyU1/9+3hlSUYU/qF7E9NF9uHP sT4DBXlbGQUqq1byOXO7vyOrm8+HN1H1QGMGqnHtdUj3vxkV0vnu7uEx+LYFL/dXCFPM /N5g== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUOjxmLJJopDxuV9V+dfUe/Tai7rtjksVk0AMYpBFxKTX6lmI32 mMvu42b9LJorFuwv4zRwzATD2aeeZxW35sc/dKf16PjJ X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzyD1MQVSW76pb81Wjhjp5sSAfqK9PoOJ6W51dRZ/eUSk6gHQspoUHTqB+viTvUFLlIQcM1mK0jmSMN1FfcXRc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:3:: with SMTP id u3mr873317oic.141.1561073085465; Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:24:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Guozhang Wang Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 16:24:33 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-467: Augment ProduceResponse error messaging To: dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ba4974058bc9a6c5" --000000000000ba4974058bc9a6c5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Jun, Thanks for your comments. 1. Yeah I think APIException would not make a distinct call here anymore, and what really matters is the RetriableException. Updated the wiki. 2. Makes sense. Updated the wiki. 3. My current thoughts is to return the first ever hit error for that partition, and also the encoded error_records would only includes the relative offsets of records that hitting that exact error as well. Guozhang On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 3:38 PM Jun Rao wrote: > Hi, Guozhang, > > Thanks for the KIP. A few comments below. > > 1. "If the error_records is not empty and the error code is not API > exception and is not retriable, still retry by creating a new batch ". > InvalidTimestampException > is an ApiException. It seems we should still retry the non-error records in > the batch. > > 2. error_records => [INT64] : Since we don't have more than 2 billion > messages per batch, we can just use INT32. It would also be useful to > describe what those numbers are. I guess they are the relative offset in > the batch? > > 3. It's possible that a batch of records hit more than one type of error > for different records, which error code and error message should the server > return to the client? > > Jun > > On Sat, May 11, 2019 at 12:44 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I'd like to start a discussion thread on this newly created KIP to > improve > > error communication and handling for producer response: > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-467%3A+Augment+ProduceResponse+error+messaging+for+specific+culprit+records > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > -- Guozhang > > > -- -- Guozhang --000000000000ba4974058bc9a6c5--