Hi Artem, I think you make a very good point. This also looks to me like it deserves a version bump for the request.
Andrew > On 8 Nov 2023, at 04:12, Artem Livshits <alivsh...@confluent.io.INVALID> > wrote: > > Hi Raman, > > Thank you for the KIP. I think using the tagged field > in DescribeTransactionsResponse should be good -- if either the client or > the server don't support it, it's not printed, which is reasonable behavior. > > For the ListTransactionsRequest, though, I think using the tagged field > could lead to a subtle compatibility issue if a new client is used with old > server: the client could specify the DurationFilter, but the old server > would ignore it and list all transactions instead, which could be > misleading or potentially even dangerous if the results are used in a > script for some automation. I think a more desirable behavior would be to > fail if the server doesn't support the new filter, which we should be able > to achieve if we bump version of the ListTransactionsRequest and add > DurationFilter as a regular field. > > -Artem > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 2:20 AM Raman Verma <raman.x.ve...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would like to start a discussion on KIP-994 >> >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-994%3A+Minor+Enhancements+to+ListTransactions+and+DescribeTransactions+APIs >>
