kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stanislav Kozlovski <stanis...@confluent.io>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-552: Add interface to handle unused config
Date Mon, 30 Dec 2019 10:07:18 GMT
Hi all,

Would printing all the unused configurations in one line, versus N lines,
be more helpful? I know that it would greatly reduce the verbosity in log
visualization tools like Kibana while still allowing us to see all the
relevant information without the need for an explicit action (e.g
changing the log level)

Best,
Stanislav

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 3:13 PM John Roesler <vvcephei@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Artur,
>
> That’s a good point.
>
> One thing you can do is log a summary at WARN level, like “27
> configurations were ignored. Ignored configurations are logged at DEBUG
> level.”
>
> I looked into the code a little, and these log messages are generated in
> AbstractConfig (logAll and logUnused). They both use the logger associated
> with the relevant config class (StreamsConfig, ProducerConfig, etc.). The
> list of all configs is logged at INFO level, and the list of unused configs
> is logged at WARN level. This means that it's not possible to silence the
> unused config messages while still logging the list of all configs. You
> could only silence both by setting (for example) ProducerConfig logger to
> ERROR or OFF.
>
> If it's desirable to be able to toggle them independently, then you can
> create a separate logger for unused configs, named something like
> "org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.ProducerConfig.unused". Then, you can
> leave the log at WARN, so it would continue to be printed by default, and
> anyone could disable it by setting
> "org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.ProducerConfig.unused" to ERROR or OFF,
> without disturbing the rest of the config log messages.
>
> It's simpler without the extra logger, but you also get less control. Do
> you think the extra control is necessary, versus printing a summary at WARN
> level?
> -John
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019, at 04:26, Artur Burtsev wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Indeed changing log level to debug would be the easiest and I think
> > that would be a good solution. When no one object I'm ready to move
> > forward with this approach and submit a MR.
> >
> > The only minor thing I have – having it at debug log level might make
> > it a bit less friendly for developers, especially for those who just
> > do the first steps in Kafka. For example, if you misspelled the
> > property name and trying to understand why things don't do what you
> > expect. Having a warning might save some time in this case. Other than
> > that I cannot see any reasons to have warnings there.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Artur
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 10:01 PM John Roesler <vvcephei@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for the KIP, Artur!
> > >
> > > For reference, here is the kip:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-552%3A+Add+interface+to+handle+unused+config
> > >
> > > I agree, these warnings are kind of a nuisance. Would it be feasible
> just to leverage log4j in some way to make it easy to filter these
> messages? For example, we could move those warnings to debug level, or even
> use a separate logger for them.
> > >
> > > Thanks for starting the discussion.
> > > -John
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, at 07:23, Artur Burtsev wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > This KIP provides a way to deal with a warning "The configuration {}
> > > > was supplied but isn't a known config." when it is not relevant.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Artur
> > > >
> >
>


-- 
Best,
Stanislav

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