is further supported by "*remote.log.disable.policy=delete:*
> Logs
> > > that
> > > > are archived in the remote storage will not be part of the contiguous
> > > > "active" log and will be deleted asynchronously as part of the
> >
of the existing
> > RemoteLogManagerScheduledThreadPool.
> >
> > 105. How is the behaviour with topic or partition deletion request
> > handled when tiered storage disablement request is still being
> > processed on a topic?
> >
> > ~Satish.
> >
>
production-grade authorization server uses https anyway and maybe users may
> want to test using http in the dev environment.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 3:56 PM Doğuşcan Namal
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Nelson, thanks for the KIP.
> >
> > From the
gt; >
> > > > I have caught up with Mehari offline and we have agreed that given
> > Apache
> > > > Kafka 4.0 being around the corner we would like to propose this
> feature
> > > > only for KRaft clusters.
> > > >
> > > > Any and al
Hi Nelson, thanks for the KIP.
>From the RFC:
```
The authorization server MUST require the use of TLS as described in
Section 1.6 when sending requests using password authentication.
```
I believe we already have an enforcement for OAuth to be enabled only in
SSLChannel but would be good to
Hi all,
There are also message.max.bytes, replica.fetch.max.bytes and their
derivatives requires a constraint on their maximum value as the maximum
total memory on the instance. Otherwise, these could cause out of memory
errors on the instance.
Do you think this is in scope here as well?
On
LGTM thanks for the KIP.
+1(non-binding)
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 15:22, Andrew Schofield <
andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi Apoorv,
> Thanks for the KIP. Looks like a useful change to tidy up the metrics code.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
>
> > On 14 Feb 2024, at 14:55, Apoorv Mittal
>
tion
> environment, there are other ways to scale up and out while retaining
> ZooKeeper as your reliable configuration/metadata store. (It's also
> cost-effective and latency-feasible to run a cross-AZ ZooKeeper cluster,
> which I would not attempt with Kafka brokers in any kind of large-
Hi Paul,
I did some benchmarking as well and couldn't find a marginal difference
between KRaft and Zookeeper on end to end latency from producers to
consumers. I tested it on Kafka version 3.5.1 and used openmessaging's
benchmarking framework https://openmessaging.cloud/docs/benchmarks/ .
What I
Hi everyone, any progress on the status of this KIP? Overall looks good to
me but I wonder whether we still need to support it for Zookeeper mode
given that it will be deprecated in the next 3 months.
On 2023/07/21 20:16:46 "Beyene, Mehari" wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> I would like to start a
Thanks for the brief KIP Andrew. Having discussed the details in KIP-714, I
see this is a natural follow up to that.
+1(non-binding)
On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 at 15:23, Andrew Schofield <
andrew_schofield_j...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I’d like to start the voting for KIP-1000: List Client Metrics
Hi Raghu,
Thanks for the short KIP.
+1(non-binding)
On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 at 23:56, Raghu B wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I would like to start a vote on KIP-982, which proposed enhancements to
> the Custom KafkaPrincipalBuilder to allow access to SslPrincipalMapper and
> KerberosShortNamer.
>
>
Hello, do we have a metric showing the uptime? We could tag that metric
with version information as well.
I like the idea of adding the version as a tag as well. However, I am not
inclined to tag each metric with a KafkaVersion information. We could
discuss which metrics could be tagged but let's
Do we have any performance test results showing the difference between
KRaft vs Zookeeper?
The one that I found online is from Redpanda comparing the tail latencies
https://redpanda.com/blog/kafka-kraft-vs-redpanda-performance-2023#the-test:-redpanda-23.1-vs.-kafka-3.4.0-with-kraft
Can I assume
ompressed data is always supported. The KIP says:
> "The CompressionType of NONE will not be
> "present in the response from the broker, though the broker does support
> uncompressed
> "client telemetry if none of the accepted compression codecs are supported
> by the clie
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for this KIP. I was thinking of something similar
so thanks for writing this down
Couple of questions related to the design:
1. Can we investigate the option for using the Kraft controllers instead of
the brokers for sending metrics? The disadvantage of sending
Hi Andrew, thanks a lot for this KIP. I was thinking of something similar
so thanks for writing this down
Couple of questions related to the design:
1. Can we investigate the option for using the Kraft controllers instead of
the brokers for sending metrics? The disadvantage of sending
17 matches
Mail list logo
