kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Colin McCabe" <cmcc...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] KIP-496: Administrative API to delete consumer offsets
Date Fri, 13 Sep 2019 16:41:00 GMT
Hi David,

Sounds good.

best,
Colin


On Fri, Sep 13, 2019, at 04:45, David Jacot wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I would like to do another modification to the proposal. In the proposal,
> the OffsetDeleteResponse
> doesn't have a top level error field so I would like to add one. Many
> errors concern the whole
> group (e.g. GROUP_ID_NOT_FOUND) so it would be great to have a way to
> communicate them
> back to the client without having to set such errors for all the requested
> partitions. It makes the
> error handling on the client easier and cleaner.
> 
> *Proposed API with the ErrorCode:*
> {
>   "apiKey": 47,
>   "type": "response",
>   "name": "OffsetDeleteResponse",
>   "validVersions": "0",
>   "fields": [
>     { "name": "ErrorCode", "type": "int16", "versions": "0+",
>       "about": "The top-level error code, or 0 if there was no error." },
>     { "name": "ThrottleTimeMs",  "type": "int32",  "versions": "0+",
> "ignorable": true,
>       "about": "The duration in milliseconds for which the request was
> throttled due to a quota violation, or zero if the request did not violate
> any quota." },
>     { "name": "Topics", "type": "[]OffsetDeleteResponseTopic", "versions":
> "0+",
>       "about": "The responses for each topic.", "fields": [
>         { "name": "Name", "type": "string", "versions": "0+", "mapKey":
> true,
>           "about": "The topic name." },
>         { "name": "Partitions", "type": "[]OffsetDeleteResponsePartition",
> "versions": "0+",
>           "about": "The responses for each partition in the topic.",
> "fields": [
>             { "name": "PartitionIndex", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+",
> "mapKey": true,
>               "about": "The partition index." },
>             { "name": "ErrorCode", "type": "int16", "versions": "0+",
>               "about": "The error code, or 0 if there was no error." }
>           ]
>         }
>       ]
>     }
>   ]
> }
> 
> I would like to know if there are any concerns or objections regarding this
> change before updating the KIP.
> 
> Best,
> David
> 
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 9:24 AM David Jacot <djacot@confluent.io> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > While implementing the KIP, I have realized that a new error code and
> > exception is required to notify the caller that offsets of a topic can not
> > be deleted because the group is actively subscribed to the topic.
> >
> > I would like to know if there are any concerns with these changes before
> > updating the KIP.
> >
> > *Proposed API:*
> > GROUP_SUBSCRIBED_TO_TOPIC(86, "The consumer group is actively subscribed
> > to the topic", GroupSubscribedToTopicException::new);
> >
> > public class GroupSubscribedToTopicException extends ApiException {
> >     public GroupSubscribedToTopicException(String message) {
> >         super(message);
> >     }
> > }
> >
> > Best,
> > David
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 10:58 AM Mickael Maison <mickael.maison@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 (non binding)
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:53 PM Colin McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019, at 11:47, Jason Gustafson wrote:
> >> > > Hey Colin, I think deleting all offsets is equivalent to deleting
the
> >> > > group, which can be done with the `deleteConsumerGroups` api. I
> >> debated
> >> > > whether there should be a way to delete partitions for all
> >> unsubscribed
> >> > > topics, but I decided to start with a simple API.
> >> >
> >> > That's a fair point-- deleting the group covers the main use-case for
> >> deleting all offsets.  So we might as well keep it simple for now.
> >> >
> >> > cheers,
> >> > Colin
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > I'm going to close this vote. The final result is +3 with myself,
> >> Guozhang,
> >> > > and Colin voting.
> >> > >
> >> > > -Jason
> >> > >
> >> > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 9:21 AM Colin McCabe <cmccabe@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi Jason,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks for the KIP.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Is there ever a desire to delete all the offsets for a given
group?
> >> > > > Should the protocol and tools support this?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > +1 (binding)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > best,
> >> > > > Colin
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019, at 10:57, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> >> > > > > +1 (binding).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Thanks Jason!
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 11:18 AM Jason Gustafson <
> >> jason@confluent.io>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hi All,
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I'd like to start a vote on KIP-496:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-496%3A+Administrative+API+to+delete+consumer+offsets
> >> > > > > > .
> >> > > > > > +1
> >> > > > > > from me of course.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > -Jason
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > --
> >> > > > > -- Guozhang
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >>
> >
>

Mime
View raw message