Hi Justine, I just took another look at the KIP, and I realize my question/suggestion about default values has already been addressed in the `Compatibility` section.
I'm +1 on the KIP. -Bill On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 6:20 PM Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Justine, > > Thanks for the well written KIP, this looks like it will be a useful > addition. > > Overall the KIP looks good to me, I have one question/comment. > > You mentioned that setting the `producer.id.expiration.ms` less than the > delivery timeout could lead to duplicates, which makes sense. To help > avoid this situation, do we want to consider a default value that is the > same as the delivery timeout? > > Thanks again for the KIP. > > Bill > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 4:54 PM Justine Olshan > <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >> Hey all! >> >> I'd like to start a discussion on my proposal to separate time-based >> producer ID expiration from transactional ID expiration by introducing a >> new configuration. >> >> The KIP Is pretty small and simple, but will be helpful in controlling >> memory usage in brokers -- especially now that by default producers are >> idempotent and create producer ID state. >> >> Please take a look and leave any comments you may have! >> >> KIP: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-854+Separate+configuration+for+producer+ID+expiry >> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14097 >> >> Thanks! >> Justine >> >
