kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] KIP-266: Add TimeoutException for KafkaConsumer#position
Date Tue, 05 Jun 2018 18:48:14 GMT
Hi Jason,

At first, I thought the same name between the producer and the consumer was
ideal.

But your comment makes me realize consistent names with different semantics
is even more confusing.

I'm +1 for not using `max.block.ms`.  I like Guozhang's suggestion of `
default.block.ms` for the name.

Thanks,
Bill

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 1:33 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangguoz@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jason,
>
> Yeah I agree that "max.block.ms" makes people thinking of the producer's
> config with the same name, but their semantics are different.
>
> On the other hand, I'm a bit concerned with the reusing of the term
> `timeout` as we already have `session.timeout.ms` and `request.timeout.ms`
> in ConsumerConfig.. How about using the name `default.api.block.ms` or
> simply `default.block.ms`?
>
>
>
> Guozhang
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 8:57 AM, Jason Gustafson <jason@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Hey All,
> >
> > One more minor follow-up. As I was reviewing the change mentioned above,
> I
> > felt the name `max.block.ms` was a little bit misleading since it only
> > applies to methods which do not have an explicit timeout. A clearer name
> > given its usage might be `default.timeout.ms`. It is the default timeout
> > for any blocking API which does not have a timeout. I'm leaning toward
> > using this name since the current one seems likely to cause confusion.
> Any
> > thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jason
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:09 PM, Dong Lin <lindong28@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the KIP! I am in favor of the option 1.
> > >
> > > +1 as well.
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 6:00 PM, Jason Gustafson <jason@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks everyone for the feedback. I've updated the KIP and added
> > > > KAFKA-6979.
> > > >
> > > > -Jason
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:50 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangguoz@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks Jason. I'm in favor of option 1 as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 1:37 PM, Bill Bejeck <bbejeck@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > For what it's worth I'm +1 on Option 1 and the default value
for
> > the
> > > > > > timeout.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In addition to reasons outlined above by Jason, I think it will
> > help
> > > to
> > > > > > reason about consumer behavior (with respect to blocking) having
> > the
> > > > > > configuration and default value aligned with the producer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Bill
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Ismael Juma <ismael@juma.me.uk>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sounds good to me,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:40 PM Jason Gustafson <
> > > jason@confluent.io
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Perhaps one minute? That is the default used by the
producer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -Jason
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Ismael Juma <
> > ismael@juma.me.uk>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Option 1 sounds good to me provided that we can
come up
> with
> > a
> > > > good
> > > > > > > > > default. What would you suggest?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ismael
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:41 AM Jason Gustafson
<
> > > > > jason@confluent.io>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > There remains some inconsistency in the
timeout behavior
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > > consumer
> > > > > > > > > > APIs which do not accept a timeout. Some
of them block
> > > forever
> > > > > > (e.g.
> > > > > > > > > > position()) and some of them use request.timeout.ms
> (e.g.
> > > > > > > > > > parititonsFor()).
> > > > > > > > > > I think we'd probably all agree that blocking
forever is
> > not
> > > > > useful
> > > > > > > > > > behavior and using request.timeout.ms has
always been a
> > hack
> > > > > since
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > controls a separate concern. I think there
are basically
> > two
> > > > > > options
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > address this:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 1. We can add max.block.ms to match the
producer and use
> > it
> > > as
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > default
> > > > > > > > > > timeout when a timeout is not explicitly
provided. This
> > will
> > > > fix
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > indefinite blocking behavior and avoid conflating
> > > > > > request.timeout.ms
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > > 2. We can deprecate the methods which don't
accept a
> > timeout.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm leaning toward the first solution because
I think we
> > want
> > > > to
> > > > > > push
> > > > > > > > > users
> > > > > > > > > > to specifying timeouts through configuration
rather than
> in
> > > > code
> > > > > > > (Jay's
> > > > > > > > > > original argument). I think the overloads
are still
> useful
> > > for
> > > > > > > advanced
> > > > > > > > > > usage (e.g. in kafka streams), but we should
give users
> an
> > > easy
> > > > > > > option
> > > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > > reasonable default behavior.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If that sounds ok, I'd propose we add it
to this KIP and
> > fix
> > > it
> > > > > > now.
> > > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > gives users an easy way to get the benefit
of the
> > > improvements
> > > > > from
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > KIP without changing any code.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 13, 2018 at 7:58 PM, Richard
Yu <
> > > > > > > > yohan.richard.yu@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > With 3 binding votes and 6 non-binding,
this KIP would
> be
> > > > > > accepted.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for participating.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 2:35 AM, Edoardo
Comar <
> > > > > > edocomar@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 10:29, zhenya
Sun <token01@126.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 non-binding
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 在 2018年5月10日,下午5:19,Manikumar
<
> > > > manikumar.reddy@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 写道:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018
at 2:33 PM, Mickael Maison <
> > > > > > > > > > > > > mickael.maison@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1 (non binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, May 10,
2018 at 9:39 AM, Rajini Sivaram
> <
> > > > > > > > > > > > > rajinisivaram@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi Richard,
Thanks for the KIP.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> +1 (binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Rajini
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Wed, May
9, 2018 at 10:54 PM, Guozhang Wang
> <
> > > > > > > > > > wangguoz@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> +1 from
me, thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Guozhang
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Wed,
May 9, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Jason
> > Gustafson <
> > > > > > > > > > > > jason@confluent.io>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Thanks
for the KIP, +1 (binding).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> One
small correction: the KIP mentions that
> > > close()
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> deprecated,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> but
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> we do
not want to do this because it is
> needed
> > by
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Closeable
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> interface.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> We only
want to deprecate close(long,
> TimeUnit)
> > > in
> > > > > > favor
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> close(Duration).
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> -Jason
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Tue,
May 8, 2018 at 12:43 AM, khaireddine
> > > > Rezgui <
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> khaireddine120@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
+1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
2018-05-07 20:35 GMT+01:00 Bill Bejeck <
> > > > > > > bbejeck@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
+1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
Bill
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Richard Yu
> <
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> yohan.richard.yu@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
Hi all, I would like to bump this thread
> > since
> > > > > > > > discussion
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> KIP
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
appears to be reaching its conclusion.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:30 PM, Richard
> Yu
> > <
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
yohan.richard.yu@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Hi all,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Since there does not seem to be too much
> > > > > discussion
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> KIP-266, I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
will
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
starting a voting thread.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Here is the link to KIP-266 for
> reference:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
https://cwiki.apache.org/
> > > > > confluence/pages/viewpage
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
action?pageId=75974886
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Recently, I have made some updates to the
> > > KIP.
> > > > To
> > > > > > > > > > reiterate,
> > > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> have
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
included KafkaConsumer's commitSync,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
poll, and committed in the KIP. (we will
> be
> > > > > adding
> > > > > > > to a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
TimeoutException
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
to them as well, in a similar manner
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
to what we will be doing for position())
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
Richard Yu
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
--
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
Ingénieur en informatique
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> -- Guozhang
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > > "When the people fear their government,
there is
> > tyranny;
> > > > > when
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > government fears the people, there
is liberty."
> [Thomas
> > > > > > > Jefferson]
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -- Guozhang
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
>

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