Thanks for the update Brian, I think I agree with Colin that we should clarify on whether / how the blocking behavior due to metadata fetch would be affected or not.
About whether this needs to be voted as a KIP: to me the behavior change is really a bug fix rather than a public contract change, since we are not incorrectly blocking a non-blocking declared function, but if people feel that we should be more careful about such changes I'm also fine with voting it as an official KIP too. Guozhang On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 12:50 AM Brian Byrne <bby...@confluent.io> wrote: > Hi Guozhang, > > Regarding metadata expiry, no access times other than the initial lookup[1] > are used for determining when to expire producer metadata. Therefore, > frequently used topics' metadata will be aged out and subsequently > refreshed (in a blocking manner) every five minutes, and infrequently used > topics will be retained for a minimum of five minutes and currently > refetched on every metadata update during that time period. The sentence is > suggesting that we could reduce the expiry time to improve the latter > without affecting (rather slightly improving) the former. > > Keep in mind that in most all cases, I wouldn't anticipate much of a > difference with producer behavior, and the extra logic can be implemented > to have insignificant cost. It's the large/dynamic topic corner cases that > we're trying to improve. > > It'd be convenient if the KIP is no longer necessary. You're right in that > there's no public API changes and the behavioral changes are entirely > internal. I'd be happy to continue the discussion around the KIP, but > unless otherwise objected, it can be retired. > > [1] Not entirely accurate, it's actually the first time when the client > calculates whether to retain the topic in its metadata. > > Thanks, > Brian > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 4:48 PM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello Brian, > > > > Could you elaborate a bit more on this sentence: "This logic can be made > > more intelligent by managing the expiry from when the topic was last > used, > > enabling the expiry duration to be reduced to improve cases where a large > > number of topics are touched intermittently." Not sure I fully understand > > the proposal. > > > > Also since now this KIP did not make any public API changes and the > > behavioral changes are not considered a public API contract (i.e. how we > > maintain the topic metadata in producer cache is never committed to > users), > > I wonder if we still need a KIP for the proposed change any more? > > > > > > Guozhang > > > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 12:43 PM Brian Byrne <bby...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > I'd like to propose a vote for a producer change to improve producer > > > behavior when dealing with a large number of topics, in part by > reducing > > > the amount of metadata fetching performed. > > > > > > The full KIP is provided here: > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-526%3A+Reduce+Producer+Metadata+Lookups+for+Large+Number+of+Topics > > > > > > And the discussion thread: > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2f8f830ef04587144cf0840c7d4811bbf0a14f3c459723dbc5acf9e@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Brian > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Guozhang > > > -- -- Guozhang
