Thanks John! Makes sense. On 5/4/20 10:00 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks for the explanation John. > > > Guozhang > > On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 7:10 PM John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi Guozhang, >> >> Ah, good question. Yes, the assignor will always now try to achieve a >> perfect balance. This was also the proposed default in the KIP before. The >> config would have allowed users to relax the search for perfection. >> >> This is actually one of our motivations now to remove it. We feel it’s >> simpler to reason about the behavior of the system if you know it’s always >> going to produce a balanced assignment. >> >> Thanks, >> John >> >> On Sun, May 3, 2020, at 19:03, Guozhang Wang wrote: >>> Hello John / Sophie: >>> >>> With this config removed, would the assignor always tries to to achieve >> the >>> "perfect balance" (of course, it may be a sub-optimal local plateau) or >>> there's an internal hard-coded factor to still retain some satisfying >>> threshold? >>> >>> Guozhang >>> >>> On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 9:23 AM John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Matthias, >>>> >>>> We originally proposed that config to allow us to skip migrating tasks >> if >>>> the current balance is “good enough”. But during implementation, we >> became >>>> concerned that supporting this option increased code complexity, and >> it’s >>>> also an extra concept for users to have to learn. >>>> >>>> To keep the new balancing system simpler both internally and >> externally, >>>> we’d like to drop it from the API for now, with the idea of adding it >> later >>>> if needed. >>>> >>>> Does that seem reasonable? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> John >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 1, 2020, at 14:18, Matthias J. Sax wrote: >>>>> Can you elaborate why to remove it? >>>>> >>>>> On 5/1/20 11:29 AM, Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: >>>>>> Hey all, >>>>>> >>>>>> We'd like to make a slight modification to the proposal in this >> KIP and >>>>>> remove >>>>>> the *balance.factor* config. We will update the KIP accordingly. >>>> Please let >>>>>> us know >>>>>> if you have any concerns. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Sophie >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:48 PM John Roesler <vvcep...@apache.org >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> After a long hiatus, I've just realized that I'm now able to >> upgrade >>>> my >>>>>>> non-binding support to a binding +1 for KIP-441. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This brings the vote tally to: >>>>>>> 3 binding +1s: Guozhang, Bill, and myself >>>>>>> 3 non-binding +1s: Bruno, Vinoth, and Sophie >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since the vote has been open for at least 72 hours, the KIP is >>>> accepted. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks all, >>>>>>> -John >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 21:02 PM John Roesler <j...@confluent.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hey all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Now that the 2.4 release storm is over, I'd like to bump this >> vote >>>>>>> thread. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Currently, we have two binding +1s (Guozhang and Bill), and four >>>>>>>> non-binding ones (Bruno, Vinoth, Sophie, and myself), and no >> vetoes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> -John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 12:54 PM Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 1:53 PM Sophie Blee-Goldman < >>>>>>> sop...@confluent.io> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:38 AM Vinoth Chandar < >>>>>>> vchan...@confluent.io> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 12:46 AM Bruno Cadonna < >> br...@confluent.io >>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 12:32 AM Guozhang Wang < >>>>>>> wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (binding). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 2:47 PM John Roesler < >> j...@confluent.io> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After a great discussion, I'd like to open voting on >> KIP-441, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to avoid long restore times in Streams after rebalancing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please cast your votes! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-441:+Smooth+Scaling+Out+for+Kafka+Streams >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -John >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Guozhang >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Attachments: >>>>> * signature.asc >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- Guozhang >>> >> > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
