Thanks Patrik, This seems to be a long and wandering issue. It seems that KAFKA-7509 has followed a similar trajectory to KAFKA-6793/KIP-552 , and 7509 is just recently closed in favor of whatever we decide to do in KAFKA-6793.
Considering (what I hope is) the whole history of this issue, a few things emerge: 1. It's useful to get warned when you pass an invalid configuration 2. It's not possible for the "top layer" (Streams, Connect, etc.) to know up front which configurations are applicable to pass down to the "second" layer (Clients, RocksDB) because those layers themselves are extensible (see below) 3. We should propose a change that fixes this issue for the whole Kafka ecosystem at once. Elaboration on point 2: Users of Kafka libraries need to register extra components like Processors, Interceptors, RocksDBConfigSetters, RebalanceListeners, etc. They need to pass configurations into these self-registered components. Therefore, the outermost component (the one that you directly pass a Properties to, and that instantiates other Configurable components) _cannot_ know which configurations are needed by the "extra" components inside the Configurable components. Therefore, no approach that involves filtering only the "needed" configurations up front, before constructing a Configurable component, could work. Randall made an aside in this comment: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7509?focusedCommentId=16673834&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16673834 which I think is the most promising path right now. Namely, to use RecordingMap (or a similar approach) when configuring internal components and finally warn when _everything_ has been wired up if some configuration value wasn't used by _any_ component. It seems like this approach would satisfy all three of the above points, but it needs some design/discovery work to see what gaps exist in the current code base to achieve the goal. It also might be a fair amount of work (which is why we didn't follow that approach in KAFKA-7509), but I don't think there have been any other suggestions that satisfy both point 1 and point 2. Thoughts? -John On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, at 02:07, Patrik Kleindl wrote: > Hi John > > Regarding Kafka Streams this can probably be fixed easily, but it does > not > handle the underlying issue that other custom prefixes are not > supported. > Seems I even did a short analysis several months ago and forgot about > it, > see > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-6793?focusedCommentId=16870899&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16870899 > > We have used custom prefixes to pass properties to the RocksDBConfigSetter > and it seems people are doing something similar in Connect, see > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7509 > > This KIP just seeks to avoid the false positives and setting it to debug > was preferred over implementing the custom prefixes. > > best regards > > Patrik > > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 at 18:21, John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Ah... I've just looked at some integration tests in Streams, and see the > > same thing. > > > > I need to apologize to everyone in the thread for my lack of > > understanding, and to > > thank Gwen for her skepticism. Looking back at the KIP itself, I see that > > Artur specifically > > listed log messages caused by Streams itself, which I failed to realize > > shouldn't be > > there at all. > > > > It now seems that we should not have a KIP at all, and also shouldn't make > > any changes > > to log levels or loggers. Instead we should treat KAFKA-6793 as a normal > > bug whose > > cause is that Streams does not correctly construct the client > > configurations when initializing > > the clients. It is leaving in the prefixed version of the client configs, > > but it should remove them. > > We should also add a test that we can specify all kinds of client > > configurations to Streams and > > that no WARN logs result during startup. > > > > Artur, what do you think about cancelling KIP-552 and instead just > > implementing a fix? > > > > Again, I'm really sorry for not realizing this sooner. And again, thanks > > to Gwen for chiming in. > > > > -John > > > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, at 02:19, Patrik Kleindl wrote: > > > Hi John > > > Starting an empty streams instance > > > > > > final String bootstrapServers = "broker0:9092"; > > > Properties streamsConfiguration = new Properties(); > > > streamsConfiguration.put(StreamsConfig.APPLICATION_ID_CONFIG, > > "configDemo"); > > > streamsConfiguration.put(StreamsConfig.BOOTSTRAP_SERVERS_CONFIG, > > > bootstrapServers); > > > StreamsBuilder builder = new StreamsBuilder(); > > > final KafkaStreams streams = new KafkaStreams(builder.build(), > > > streamsConfiguration); > > > streams.start(); > > > > > > results in: > > > > > > stream-thread > > > [configDemo-bcaf82b4-324d-4956-a2a8-1dea0a8e3a2e-StreamThread-1] > > > Creating consumer client > > > ConsumerConfig values: > > > ... > > > stream-thread > > > [configDemo-bcaf82b4-324d-4956-a2a8-1dea0a8e3a2e-StreamThread-1-consumer] > > > Cooperative rebalancing enabled now > > > The configuration 'admin.retries' was supplied but isn't a known config. > > > The configuration 'admin.retry.backoff.ms' was supplied but isn't a > > > known config. > > > Kafka version: 2.4.0 > > > > > > when the normal consumer is created, but not for admin client / > > > producer / restore consumer. > > > > > > StreamsConfig seems to include this on purpose: > > > > > > final AdminClientConfig adminClientDefaultConfig = new > > > AdminClientConfig(getClientPropsWithPrefix(ADMIN_CLIENT_PREFIX, > > > AdminClientConfig.configNames())); > > > consumerProps.put(adminClientPrefix(AdminClientConfig.RETRIES_CONFIG), > > > adminClientDefaultConfig.getInt(AdminClientConfig.RETRIES_CONFIG)); > > > > > consumerProps.put(adminClientPrefix(AdminClientConfig.RETRY_BACKOFF_MS_CONFIG), > > > > > adminClientDefaultConfig.getLong(AdminClientConfig.RETRY_BACKOFF_MS_CONFIG)); > > > > > > If I add > > > > > > > > streamsConfiguration.put(StreamsConfig.restoreConsumerPrefix(ConsumerConfig.RECEIVE_BUFFER_CONFIG), > > > 65536); > > > > > streamsConfiguration.put(StreamsConfig.mainConsumerPrefix(ConsumerConfig.MAX_POLL_RECORDS_CONFIG), > > > 100); > > > > > > then the warnings > > > > > > The configuration 'main.consumer.max.poll.records' was supplied but > > > isn't a known config. > > > The configuration 'restore.consumer.receive.buffer.bytes' was supplied > > > but isn't a known config. > > > > > > are shown for all clients, not only the last consumer. > > > > > > Streams provides these prefixes so maybe they are not handled > > > correctly regarding the log message. > > > > > > Maybe this helps to pinpoint the source of this in KS at least > > > > > > best regards > > > > > > Patrik > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 at 05:11, John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > Looking at where the log message comes from: > > > > org.apache.kafka.common.config.AbstractConfig#logUnused > > > > it seems like maybe the warning just happens when you pass > > > > extra configs to a client that it has no knowledge of (and therefore > > > > doesn't "use"). > > > > > > > > I'm now suspicious if Streams is actually sending extra configs to the > > > > clients, although it seems like we _don't_ see these warnings in other > > > > cases. > > > > > > > > Maybe some of the folks who actually see these messages can try to > > pinpoint > > > > where exactly the rogue configs are coming from? > > > > > > > > I might have overlooked a message at some point, but it wasn't clear to > > > > me that we were talking about warnings that were actually caused by > > > > Streams. > > > > I thought the unknown configs were something user-specified. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -John > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 7, 2020, at 13:10, Gwen Shapira wrote: > > > > > Ah, got it! I am indeed curious why they do this :) > > > > > > > > > > Maybe John can shed more light. But if we can't find a better fix, > > > > > perhaps the nice thing to do is really a separate logger, so users > > who > > > > > are not worried about shooting themselves in the foot can make those > > > > > warnings go away. > > > > > > > > > > Gwen Shapira > > > > > Engineering Manager | Confluent > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap > > > > > Follow us: Twitter | blog > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 4:13 AM, Patrik Kleindl < pklei...@gmail.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Gwen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kafka Streams is not a third party library and produces a lot of > > these > > > > > > warnings, e.g. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *The configuration 'main.consumer.max.poll.records' was supplied > > but > > > > isn't > > > > > > a known config.* > > > > > > *The configuration 'admin.retries' was supplied but isn't a known > > > > config.* > > > > > > and various others if you try to fine-tune the restoration > > consumer or > > > > > > inject parameters for state stores. > > > > > > This results in a lot of false positives and only makes new people > > > > worried > > > > > > and then ignore the warnings altogether. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless this is taken care of at least the Kafka Streams users will > > > > > > probably be better off having this on debug level. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Patrik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 at 16:55, Gwen Shapira < gwen@ confluent. io ( > > > > > > g...@confluent.io ) > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> INFO is the default log level, and while it looks less "alarming" > > than > > > > > >> WARN, users will still see it and in my experience, they will > > worry > > > > that > > > > > >> something is wrong anyway. Or if INFO isn't the default, users > > won't > > > > see > > > > > >> it, so it is no different from debug and we are left with no way > > of > > > > > >> warning users that they misconfigured something. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> The point is that "known configs" exist in Kafka as a validation > > > > step. It > > > > > >> is there to protect users. So anything that makes the concerns > > about > > > > > >> unknown configs invisible to users, makes the validation step > > useless > > > > and > > > > > >> we may as well remove it. I'm against that - I think users should > > be > > > > made > > > > > >> aware of misconfigs as much as possible - especially since if you > > > > misspell > > > > > >> > > > > > >> "retention", you will lose data. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> If we look away from the symptom and go back to the actual > > cause.... > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I think Kafka had a way (and maybe it still does) for 3rd party > > > > developers > > > > > >> who create client plugins (mostly interceptors) to make their > > configs > > > > > >> "known". 3rd party developers should be responsible for the good > > > > > >> experience of their users. Now it is possible that you'll pick a > > 3rd > > > > party > > > > > >> library that didn't do it and have a worse user experience, but I > > am > > > > not > > > > > >> sure it is the job of Apache Kafka to protect users from their > > choice > > > > of > > > > > >> libraries > > > > > >> (and as long as those libraries are OSS, users can fix them). > > > > Especially > > > > > >> not at the expense of someone who doesn't use 3rd party libs. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Gwen > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Gwen Shapira > > > > > >> Engineering Manager | Confluent > > > > > >> 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap > > > > > >> Follow us: Twitter | blog > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 2:06 AM, Artur Burtsev < artjock@ gmail. > > com > > > > ( > > > > > >> artj...@gmail.com ) > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Hi John, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> In out case it wont help, since we are running instance per > > > > partition and > > > > > >>> even with summary only we get 32 warnings per rollout. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Hi Gwen, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Thanks for you reply, I understand and share your concern, I also > > > > > >>> mentioned it earlier in the thread. Do you think it will work if > > we > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> change > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> DEBUG to INFO? > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > > >>> Artur > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 4:21 AM Gwen Shapira < gwen@ confluent. > > io ( > > > > gwen@ confluent. > > > > > >>> io ( g...@confluent.io ) ) > wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Sorry for late response. The reason that unused configs is in > > WARN > > > > is > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> that > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> if you misspell a config, it means that it will not apply. In > > some > > > > cases > > > > > >>>> (default retention) you want know until too late. We wanted to > > warn > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> admins > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> about possible misconfigurations. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> In the context of a company supporting Kafka - customers run > > logs at > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> INFO > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> level normally, so if we suspect a misconfiguration, we don't > > want > > > > to > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> ask > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> the customer to change level to DEBUG and bounce the broker. It > > is > > > > time > > > > > >>>> consuming and can be risky. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> *Gwen Shapira* > > > > > >>>> Product Manager | Confluent > > > > > >>>> 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap > > > > > >>>> Follow us: Twitter ( https:/ / twitter. com/ ConfluentInc ( > > https:/ > > > > / twitter. > > > > > >>>> com/ ConfluentInc ( https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc ) ) ) | > > blog > > > > ( http:/ > > > > > >>>> / www. confluent. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> io/ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> blog ( http:/ / www. confluent. io/ blog ( > > > > http://www.confluent.io/blog ) ) > > > > > >>>> ) > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Sent via Superhuman ( https:/ / sprh. mn/ ?vip=gwen@ > > confluent. io > > > > ( https:/ > > > > > >>>> / sprh. mn/ ?vip=gwen@ confluent. io ( > > > > > >>>> https://sprh.mn/?vip=g...@confluent.io ) ) ) > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 4:21 AM, Stanislav Kozlovski < > > stanislav@ > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> confluent. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> io ( stanislav@ confluent. io ( stanis...@confluent.io ) ) > > > wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Hey Artur, > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Perhaps changing the log level to DEBUG is the simplest > > approach. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> I wonder if other people know what the motivation behind the > > WARN > > > > log > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> was? > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> I'm struggling to think up of a scenario where I'd like to see > > > > unused > > > > > >>>>> values printed in anything above DEBUG. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> Best, > > > > > >>>>> Stanislav > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 12:52 PM Artur Burtsev < artjock@ > > gmail. > > > > com > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> ( artjock@ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> gmail. com ( artjock@ gmail. com ( artj...@gmail.com ) ) ) > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Hi, > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Indeed changing the log level for the whole AbstractConfig is > > not > > > > an > > > > > >>>>>> option, because logAll is extremely useful. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Grouping warnings into 1 (with the count of unused only) will > > not > > > > be a > > > > > >>>>>> good option for us either. It will still be pretty noisy. > > Imagine > > > > we > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> have > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> 32 partitions and scaled up the application to 32 instances > > then > > > > we > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> still > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> have 32 warnings per application (instead of 96 now) while we > > > > would > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> like > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> to have 0 warnings because we are perfectly aware of using > > > > > >>>>>> schema.registry.url and its totally fine, and we don't have > > to be > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> warned > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> every time we start the application. Now imagine we use more > > than > > > > one > > > > > >>>>>> consumer per application, then it will add another > > multiplication > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> factor > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> to these grouped warnings and we still have a lot of those. > > So I > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> would say > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> grouping doesn't help much. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> I think adding extra logger like > > > > > >>>>>> "org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.ProducerConfig.unused" > > could be > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> another > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> good option. That would leave the existing interface > > untouched and > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> give > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> everyone an option to mute irrelevant warnings. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> To summarize, I still can see 3 options with its pros and cons > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> discussed > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> in the thread: > > > > > >>>>>> 1) extra config with interface to handle unused > > > > > >>>>>> 2) change unused warn to debug > > > > > >>>>>> 3) add extra logger for unused > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Please let me know what do you think. > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > >>>>>> Artur > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 11:07 AM Stanislav Kozlovski > > > > > >>>>>> < stanislav@ confluent. io ( stanislav@ confluent. io ( > > > > stanislav@ confluent. > > > > > >>>>>> io ( stanis...@confluent.io ) ) ) > wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Hi all, > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Would printing all the unused configurations in one line, > > versus > > > > N > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> lines, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> be more helpful? I know that it would greatly reduce the > > > > verbosity > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> in log > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> visualization tools like Kibana while still allowing us to > > see > > > > all > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> relevant information without the need for an explicit action > > (e.g > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> changing > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> the log level) > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> Best, > > > > > >>>>>>> Stanislav > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 3:13 PM John Roesler < vvcephei@ > > apache. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> org ( vvcephei@ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> apache. org ( vvcephei@ apache. org ( vvcep...@apache.org ) > > ) ) > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Hi Artur, > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> That’s a good point. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> One thing you can do is log a summary at WARN level, like > > “27 > > > > > >>>>>>>> configurations were ignored. Ignored configurations are > > logged > > > > at > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> DEBUG > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> level.” > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I looked into the code a little, and these log messages are > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> generated > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> in > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> AbstractConfig (logAll and logUnused). They both use the > > logger > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> associated > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> with the relevant config class (StreamsConfig, > > ProducerConfig, > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> etc.). > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> The > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> list of all configs is logged at INFO level, and the list of > > > > unused > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> configs > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> is logged at WARN level. This means that it's not possible > > to > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> silence > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> the > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> unused config messages while still logging the list of all > > > > configs. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> You > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> could only silence both by setting (for example) > > ProducerConfig > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> logger > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> to > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> ERROR or OFF. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> If it's desirable to be able to toggle them independently, > > then > > > > you > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> can > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> create a separate logger for unused configs, named something > > > > like > > > > > >>>>>>>> "org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.ProducerConfig.unused". > > > > Then, you > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> can > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> leave the log at WARN, so it would continue to be printed by > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> default, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> and > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> anyone could disable it by setting > > > > > >>>>>>>> "org.apache.kafka.clients.producer.ProducerConfig.unused" to > > > > ERROR > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> or > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> OFF, > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> without disturbing the rest of the config log messages. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> It's simpler without the extra logger, but you also get less > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> control. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> Do > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> you think the extra control is necessary, versus printing a > > > > summary > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> at > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> WARN > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> level? > > > > > >>>>>>>> -John > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 27, 2019, at 04:26, Artur Burtsev wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Indeed changing log level to debug would be the easiest > > and I > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> think that > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> would be a good solution. When no one object I'm ready to > > move > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> forward > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> with this approach and submit a MR. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> The only minor thing I have – having it at debug log level > > > > might > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> make it a > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> bit less friendly for developers, especially for those who > > > > just do > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> first steps in Kafka. For example, if you misspelled the > > > > property > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> name and > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> trying to understand why things don't do what you expect. > > > > Having a > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> warning > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> might save some time in this case. Other > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> than > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> that I cannot see any reasons to have warnings there. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks, > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Artur > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 10:01 PM John Roesler < vvcephei@ > > > > apache. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> org ( vvcephei@ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> apache. org ( vvcephei@ apache. org ( vvcep...@apache.org > > ) ) > > > > ) > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the KIP, Artur! > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> For reference, here is the kip: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> https:/ / cwiki. apache. org/ confluence/ display/ KAFKA/ > > > > > >>>>>> KIP-552%3A+Add+interface+to+handle+unused+config > > > > > >>>>>> ( > > > > > >>>>>> https:/ / cwiki. apache. org/ confluence/ display/ KAFKA/ > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> KIP-552%3A+Add+interface+to+handle+unused+config > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> ( > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> https:/ / cwiki. apache. org/ confluence/ display/ KAFKA/ > > > > KIP-552%3A+Add+interface+to+handle+unused+config > > > > > >> ( > > > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-552%3A+Add+interface+to+handle+unused+config > > > > > >> ) > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> ) > > > > > >>>>>> ) > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I agree, these warnings are kind of a nuisance. Would it > > be > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> feasible > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> just to leverage log4j in some way to make it easy to filter > > > > these > > > > > >>>>>>>> messages? For example, we could move those warnings to debug > > > > level, > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> or > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> even > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> use a separate logger for them. > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting the discussion. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> -John > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, at 07:23, Artur Burtsev wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> This KIP provides a way to deal with a warning "The > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> configuration {} > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> was supplied but isn't a known config." when it is not > > > > relevant. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Artur > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>>>> Best, > > > > > >>>>>>> Stanislav > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>> Best, > > > > > >>>>> Stanislav > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
