Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-0.11.0-jdk7 #412

See Changes: [wangguoz] KAFKA-7990: Close streams at the end in KafkaStreamsTest (#6334) -- [...truncated 1.56 MB...]

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-0.10.2-jdk7 #242

See Changes: [wangguoz] KAFKA-7990: Close streams at the end in KafkaStreamsTest (#6334) -- [...truncated 168.35 KB...] kafka.server.ClientQuotaManagerTest >

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3420

See Changes: [mjsax] MINOR: fix parameter naming (#6316) -- [...truncated 2.31 MB...] org.apache.kafka.connect.data.ConnectSchemaTest > testValidateValueMismatchDouble

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-8007) In-memory window store copies on fetch

Sophie Blee-Goldman created KAFKA-8007: -- Summary: In-memory window store copies on fetch Key: KAFKA-8007 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8007 Project: Kafka Issue Type:

Re: Release Date : 2.2.0

KAFKA-7895 is addressed in 2.2.0-rc0. You can look at https://github.com/apache/kafka/commits/2.2.0-rc0 which has the respective commit . Thanks, Satish. On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 9:36 AM Vaibhav Shukla wrote: > I

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-426: Persist Broker Id to Zookeeper

Thanks for the KIP Kan. I think the design will be simpler if we just deprecate storing broker.id in meta.properties and start storing it in zookeeper as you suggested. Thanks, Harsha On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, at 2:40 PM, Li Kan wrote: > My bad, forgot to put the link to the KIP: >

Re: Release Date : 2.2.0

I am not seeing the below defect https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7895 is this not being a part of 2.2.0? -Vaibhav- On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:19 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > Target release date is 2/28 (cf. >

Re: Release Date : 2.2.0

Target release date is 2/28 (cf. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=100827512) The first RC was cut on Saturday and the VOTE is running. -Matthias On 2/26/19 7:06 PM, Vaibhav Shukla wrote: > Guys, > > Any idea when we have the release 2.2.0. > > Vaibhav >

Release Date : 2.2.0

Guys, Any idea when we have the release 2.2.0. Vaibhav

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-8006) Guard calls to init() and close() within user code

Matthias J. Sax created KAFKA-8006: -- Summary: Guard calls to init() and close() within user code Key: KAFKA-8006 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8006 Project: Kafka Issue

Re: [DISCUSSION] KIP-422: Add support for user/client configuration in the Kafka Admin Client

Hello Colin, There is a POC PR for this KIP, and it contains most changes we are proposing now. Best, Yaodong On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:51 PM Yaodong Yang wrote: > Hello Colin, > > CIL, > > Thanks! > Yaodong > > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:59 AM Colin McCabe wrote: > >> Hi Yaodong, >> >> I

Re: [DISCUSSION] KIP-422: Add support for user/client configuration in the Kafka Admin Client

Hello Colin, CIL, Thanks! Yaodong On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:59 AM Colin McCabe wrote: > Hi Yaodong, > > I don't understand how the proposed API would be used. It talks about > adding a ConfigResource type for clients and users, but doesn't explain > what can be done with these. > Sorry for

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-427: Add AtMinIsr topic partition category (new metric & TopicCommand option)

Hi Dong! Thanks for the feedback! You bring up a good point in that the AtMinIsr metric cannot be used to identify failure in the mentioned scenarios. I admit the motivation section placed too much emphasis on "identifying failure". I have modified the KIP to reflect the implementation as the

Re: [VOTE] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

I think all the open questions have been addressed and updated in the DISCUSS thread, and thus I'm +1 on this KIP now. Guozhang On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:01 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > -Matthias > > On 1/25/19 9:49 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > > Fair enough; could you

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

After reading John's latest response, I agree as well. +1(binding) -Bill On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 9:09 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > Florian, > > Thanks for updating the KIP. > > I missed the missing `static` on `Suppressed#withName()` and I agree > with John and Guozhang. > > Don't have any

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

Florian, Thanks for updating the KIP. I missed the missing `static` on `Suppressed#withName()` and I agree with John and Guozhang. Don't have any further comments. And thanks for splitting the PR! @Guozhang: there is already a VOTE thread. -Matthias On 2/26/19 3:26 PM, Guozhang Wang

Re: [VOTE] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

+1 (binding) -Matthias On 1/25/19 9:49 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Fair enough; could you summarize the open questions on the DISCUSS thread > then? > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 9:46 AM Matthias J. Sax > wrote: > >> Guozhang, >> >> KIP deadline passed yesterday. The last comments on the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-427: Add AtMinIsr topic partition category (new metric & TopicCommand option)

Hey Kevin, Thanks for the proposal! It seems that the proposed implementation does not match the motivation. The motivation suggests that the operator wants to tell the planned maintenance (e.g. broker restart) from unplanned failure (e.g. network failure). But the use of the metric AtMinIsr

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-433: Provide client API version to authorizer

Hi Colin, "> I think Ismael and Gwen here bring up a good point. The version of the > request is a technical detail that isn't really related to > authorization. There are a lot of other technical details like this > like the size of the request, the protocol it came in on, etc. None

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

Bill, John, thanks for your comments. I agree with John that we can leave Suppressed to not have a static method `as` for now since it is not useful at the moment. Assuming that is agreed on, I think we can move on to the voting process. Guozhang On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:56 PM John Roesler

[jira] [Reopened] (KAFKA-7937) Flaky Test ResetConsumerGroupOffsetTest.testResetOffsetsNotExistingGroup

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7937?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Matthias J. Sax reopened KAFKA-7937: Happened again on `trunk`:

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-8005) Flaky Test ServerShutdownTest#testCleanShutdownAfterFailedStartupDueToCorruptLogs

Matthias J. Sax created KAFKA-8005: -- Summary: Flaky Test ServerShutdownTest#testCleanShutdownAfterFailedStartupDueToCorruptLogs Key: KAFKA-8005 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8005

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

Thanks for the feedback, Bill. It might be a good idea to hold of on adding the static method to Suppressed for now... Unlike the other operator/config-class pairs, `suppress` has no "default" mode. That is, there is no `KTable.suppress()` method with no arguments. So, when using it, you must

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3419

See

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-trunk-jdk11 #320

See

Re: [VOTE] KIP-430 - Return Authorized Operations in Describe Responses

Thanks Colin, I have updated the KIP to mention that we don't return UNKNOWN, ANY or ALL. Regards, Rajini On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:10 PM Colin McCabe wrote: > Thanks, Rajini! Just to make it clear, can we spell out that we don't set > the UNKNOWN, ANY, or ALL bits ever? > > +1 once that's

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-433: Provide client API version to authorizer

In general, making authorization decision based on client version might not be a good idea. It will just provide a loop hole for someone to downgrade their client version to exploit or workaround any restrictions. > > propose a single broker dynamic configuration: client.min.api.version, to >

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk11 #319

See Changes: [bbejeck] [TRIVIAL] Remove unused StreamsGraphNode#repartitionRequired (#6227) -- [...truncated 2.32 MB...]

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3418

See Changes: [bbejeck] [TRIVIAL] Remove unused StreamsGraphNode#repartitionRequired (#6227) -- [...truncated 2.31 MB...] org.apache.kafka.streams.test.OutputVerifierTest

Re: [VOTE] KIP-430 - Return Authorized Operations in Describe Responses

Thanks, Rajini! Just to make it clear, can we spell out that we don't set the UNKNOWN, ANY, or ALL bits ever? +1 once that's resolved. cheers, Colin On Mon, Feb 25, 2019, at 04:11, Rajini Sivaram wrote: > Hi Colin, > > Yes, it makes sense to reduce response size by using bit fields. Updated

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-433: Provide client API version to authorizer

Hi Harsha, I think Ismael and Gwen here bring up a good point. The version of the request is a technical detail that isn't really related to authorization. There are a lot of other technical details like this like the size of the request, the protocol it came in on, etc. None of them are

Re: [DISCUSSION] KIP-422: Add support for user/client configuration in the Kafka Admin Client

Hi Yaodong, I don't understand how the proposed API would be used. It talks about adding a ConfigResource type for clients and users, but doesn't explain what can be done with these. In the compatibility section (?) it says "We only add a new way to configure the quotas" which suggests that

[jira] [Resolved] (KAFKA-7956) Avoid blocking in ShutdownableThread.awaitShutdown if the thread has not been started

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7956?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jun Rao resolved KAFKA-7956. Resolution: Fixed Assignee: Gardner Vickers Fix Version/s: 2.3.0 Merged the PR to trunk.

[jira] [Resolved] (KAFKA-7999) Flaky Test ExampleConnectIntegrationTest#testProduceConsumeConnector

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7999?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Arjun Satish resolved KAFKA-7999. - Resolution: Fixed PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6326 > Flaky Test

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-409: Allow creating under-replicated topics and partitions

Hi Mickael, I don't think adding CREATED_UNDER_REPLICATED as an error code makes sense. It is not an error condition, as described here. > Updates to the Decommissioning brokers section in the documentation > will mention that if a broker id is never to be reused then its corresponding > node

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-307: Allow to define custom processor names with KStreams DSL

Hi Florian, Thanks for the update to the KIP. As for changing the name for "Suppressed#withName", I believe we can update the table in KIP to say "Suppressed#as" as the KIP states that: >> In addition, we propose to add a new static method with the following signature to each of those class

Re: [VOTE] 2.2.0 RC0

Downloaded, compiled and passed all tests successfully. Ran quickstart (https://kafka.apache.org/quickstart) up to step 6 without issue. (+1 non-binding). Adam On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:19 PM Matthias J. Sax wrote: > @Stephane > > Thanks! You are right (I copied the list from an older

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-trunk-jdk8 #3417

See

Jenkins build is back to normal : kafka-2.2-jdk8 #34

See

[jira] [Created] (KAFKA-8003) Flaky Test TransactionsTest #testFencingOnTransactionExpiration

Matthias J. Sax created KAFKA-8003: -- Summary: Flaky Test TransactionsTest #testFencingOnTransactionExpiration Key: KAFKA-8003 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8003 Project: Kafka

Build failed in Jenkins: kafka-2.0-jdk8 #230

See Changes: [rhauch] MINOR: Increase produce timeout to 120 seconds (#6326) -- [...truncated 1.99 MB...] org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.RecordMetadataTest >