+1 (non-binding) This will be great to have, thanks Jason!
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 4:29 AM Manikumar <manikumar.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding). > > Thanks for the KIP. LGTM. > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 3:12 PM Satish Duggana <satish.dugg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Jason, > > +1 (non binding) Thanks for the KIP! > > > > Do we need to have a separate JIRA to update the docs as it introduces > new > > metrics and a change in behavior for the existing metric? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 2:41 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > +1 (non binding) > > > Thanks Jason > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 8:15 AM David Jacot <dja...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > David > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:55 PM Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to start a vote on KIP-352, which is a follow-up to > KIP-455 > > > to fix > > > > > a long-known shortcoming of URP reporting and to improve > reassignment > > > > > monitoring: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-352%3A+Distinguish+URPs+caused+by+reassignment > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > Note that I have added one new metric following the discussion. It > > > seemed > > > > > useful to have a lag metric for reassigning partitions. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Jason > > > > > > > > > > >
