Hi Kamal, it looks like all TS configurations starts with "remote." prefix, so I was wondering if we should name it "remote.fetch.max.wait.ms".
On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 7:07 PM Kamal Chandraprakash <kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > If there are no more comments, I'll start a vote thread by tomorrow. > Please review the KIP. > > Thanks, > Kamal > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 11:08 PM Kamal Chandraprakash < > kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Bumping the thread. Please review this KIP. Thanks! > > > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 9:11 PM Kamal Chandraprakash < > > kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Jorge, > >> > >> Thanks for the review! Added your suggestions to the KIP. PTAL. > >> > >> The `fetch.max.wait.ms` config will be also applicable for topics > >> enabled with remote storage. > >> Updated the description to: > >> > >> ``` > >> The maximum amount of time the server will block before answering the > >> fetch request > >> when it is reading near to the tail of the partition (high-watermark) and > >> there isn't > >> sufficient data to immediately satisfy the requirement given by > >> fetch.min.bytes. > >> ``` > >> > >> -- > >> Kamal > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 12:12 AM Jorge Esteban Quilcate Otoya < > >> quilcate.jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Kamal, > >>> > >>> Thanks for this KIP! It should help to solve one of the main issues with > >>> tiered storage at the moment that is dealing with individual consumer > >>> configurations to avoid flooding logs with interrupted exceptions. > >>> > >>> One of the topics discussed in [1][2] was on the semantics of ` > >>> fetch.max.wait.ms` and how it's affected by remote storage. Should we > >>> consider within this KIP the update of `fetch.max.wail.ms` docs to > >>> clarify > >>> it only applies to local storage? > >>> > >>> Otherwise, LGTM -- looking forward to see this KIP adopted. > >>> > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15776 > >>> [2] https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14778#issuecomment-1820588080 > >>> > >>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 at 01:01, Kamal Chandraprakash < > >>> kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Hi all, > >>> > > >>> > I have opened a KIP-1018 > >>> > < > >>> > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1018%3A+Introduce+max+remote+fetch+timeout+config+for+DelayedRemoteFetch+requests > >>> > > > >>> > to introduce dynamic max-remote-fetch-timeout broker config to give > >>> more > >>> > control to the operator. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1018%3A+Introduce+max+remote+fetch+timeout+config+for+DelayedRemoteFetch+requests > >>> > > >>> > Let me know if you have any feedback or suggestions. > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > Kamal > >>> > > >>> > >>
