Hey all. I've updated the kip to include a configuration change. This will
allow users to disable the verification step. This will be for
performance-conscious customers who can sacrifice possible hanging
transactions in order achieve latency goals.
This is because the second AddPartition call may introduce slightly slower
produce requests. I do plan to optimize and make this as fast as possible,
but I suspect some folks will want this as an option.
Of course, the best solution will be to update the clients. But until that
is available, we offer the configuration. Let me know if there are any
questions.

Thanks,
Justine

On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:55 AM Justine Olshan <jols...@confluent.io>
wrote:

> Yup -- those are the main changes!
>
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 9:44 AM Guozhang Wang <guozhang.wang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Justine. I checked the diff between the two versions on wiki,
>> seems the major changes are:
>>
>> 1) Move the `verifyOnly` field of the request into each transaction
>> and hence we no longer have any top-level primitive fields.
>> 2) Add a top-level `errorCode` field in the response.
>>
>> Is that summary right?
>>
>>
>> Guozhang
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 4:51 PM Justine Olshan
>> <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hey all,
>> >
>> > I've updated the KIP to slightly change some of the request and response
>> > specs for AddPartitionsToTxn. Nothing huge, but some points came up
>> during
>> > PR review.
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-890%3A+Transactions+Server-Side+Defense
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Justine
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 8:40 AM Justine Olshan <jols...@confluent.io>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Thanks everyone! I'm going to close the vote.
>> > > The KIP is accepted with five binding votes from Jason, Guozhang,
>> > > Matthias, David (and me), and two non-binding votes from Colt and
>> Artem.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks again,
>> > > Justine
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 11:41 PM David Jacot
>> <dja...@confluent.io.invalid>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Thanks for the KIP, Justine. +1 (binding)
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 1:36 AM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Thanks for the KIP!
>> > >> >
>> > >> > +1 (binding)
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On 2/2/23 4:18 PM, Artem Livshits wrote:
>> > >> > > (non-binding) +1.  Looking forward to the implementation and
>> fixing
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > issues that we've got.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > -Artem
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 2:25 PM Guozhang Wang <
>> > >> > guozhang.wang...@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >> Thanks Justine, I have no further comments on the KIP. +1.
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:34 AM Jason Gustafson
>> > >> > >> <ja...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> +1. Thanks Justine!
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> -Jason
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 3:46 PM Colt McNealy <
>> c...@littlehorse.io>
>> > >> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > >>>
>> > >> > >>>> (non-binding) +1. Thank you for the KIP, Justine! I've read
>> it; it
>> > >> > >> makes
>> > >> > >>>> sense to me and I am excited for the implementation.
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>>> Colt McNealy
>> > >> > >>>> *Founder, LittleHorse.io*
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:46 AM Justine Olshan
>> > >> > >>>> <jols...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>>>> Hi everyone,
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>> I would like to start a vote on KIP-890 which aims to
>> prevent some
>> > >> > >> of the
>> > >> > >>>>> common causes of hanging transactions and make other general
>> > >> > >> improvements
>> > >> > >>>>> to transactions in Kafka.
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-890%3A+Transactions+Server-Side+Defense
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>> Please take a look if you haven't already and vote!
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>> Justine
>> > >> > >>>>>
>> > >> > >>>>
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>>
>

Reply via email to