+1 from me as well (non-binding) Gokul, it looks you've now received enough binding votes and the vote has been open for sufficiently long. You can conclude the vote and open the PR for review when it's ready
Cheers, Sophie On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 2:47 PM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1. Thanks for the KIP Gokul ! > > Guozhang > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 6:52 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > On 9/8/20 2:49 PM, Jason Gustafson wrote: > > > +1 Thanks for the KIP! > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:25 PM Gokul Srinivas <apa...@nym3r0s.cc> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> I would like to call a vote on the following KIP. > > >> > > >> *KIP *- > > >> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-654:+Aborted+transaction+with+non-flushed+data+should+throw+a+non-fatal+exception > > >> < > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-654:+Aborted+transaction+with+non-flushed+data+should+throw+a+non-fatal+exception > > >>> > > >> > > >> TL;DR: This KIP proposes to throw a new, non-fatal exception whilst > > >> aborting transactions with non-flushed data. This will help users > > >> distinguish non-fatal errors and potentially retry the batch. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> -Gokul > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >
