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 <dja...@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.mai...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 11:53 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@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 <cmcc...@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 <
>> ja...@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
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>>
>
