Hi PoAn,

Yes, the metrics are exposed for both brokers and controllers:


- Brokers: kafka.server:type=KafkaServer,name=<metric-name>

- Controllers: kafka.server:type=ControllerServer,name=<metric-name>



I have updated the KIP to explicitly mention both JMX paths.

Thanks,
Sahil

On Mon, May 4, 2026 at 12:32 PM PoAn Yang <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Sahil,
>
> Thanks for the KIP.
>
> The KIP mentioned “All metrics exposed under
> kafka.server:type=KafkaServer,name=<metric-name>”.
> This is for brokers. Should it also mention
> "kafka.server:type=ControllerServer” for controllers?
>
> Kind Regards,
> PoAn
>
> > On Apr 4, 2026, at 4:54 PM, Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I agree with separating the concerns. Filing a follow-on KIP for the
> migration and deprecation plan is a pragmatic approach. Let's move forward
> with KIP-1291 as an additive change first.
> >
> > On 2026/04/04 08:26:37 Sahil Devgon wrote:
> >> Hi CHia-Ping,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the review and joining the discussion. I agree that Kafka
> >> native metrics are the right long-term home for these and that the
> existing
> >> Yammer metrics for linux-disk-read-bytes and linux-disk-write-bytes
> should
> >> eventually be migrated. However, I'd like to propose separating these
> >> concerns:
> >>
> >> KIP-1291 <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/co48G> (this KIP):
> Remain
> >> purely additive - expose the 5 missing metrics under the existing
> >> kafka.server:type=KafkaServer,name=linux-disk-* convention. The KIP's
> >> stated guarantee is zero operational impact and no migration burden for
> >> existing deployments.
> >>
> >> Follow-on KIP: Once the 5 metrics are established, a separate KIP can
> >> migrate all 7 linux I/O metrics to a dedicated native metrics group
> (e.g.,
> >> type=linux-io-metrics) and formally deprecate the Yammer equivalents
> with a
> >> clear timeline.
> >>
> >> My concern with combining them in KIP-1291
> >> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/co48G> is that deprecation ,
> even of
> >> metrics that remain functional , is not a zero-impact change for
> operators
> >> running dashboards and alerts against the existing MBean. It also opens
> >> discussion on naming conventions, deprecation
> >> timelines, and coordination with broader Yammer migration work, all of
> >> which could delay shipping the 5 metrics that are the core of this KIP
> and
> >> that operators need today.
> >>
> >> I'm happy to file the follow-on KIP alongside this one so the community
> can
> >> see the full intended path. Would that be acceptable?
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Sahil Devgon
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2026 at 1:22 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> hi
> >>>
> >>> I am concerned about adding more Yammer metrics. Instead, we should
> create
> >>> a new metrics group (e.g., type=linux-io-metrics,cluster-id=aaa) for
> all
> >>> seven metrics using Kafka native metrics. This way, the seven
> parameters
> >>> can be grouped together as a single MBean. We can then deprecate the
> >>> original Yammer metrics for linux-disk-read-bytes and
> linux-disk-write-bytes
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> CHia-Ping
> >>>
> >>> On 2026/02/25 14:50:44 Sahil Devgon wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I would like to start a discussion thread on KIP-1291. In this KIP, we
> >>> aim
> >>>> to expose all 7 Linux I/O metrics from /proc/self/io instead of just
> the
> >>>> current 2 (read_bytes and write_bytes).
> >>>> The 5 additional metrics (rchar, wchar, syscr, syscw,
> >>>> cancelled_write_bytes) enable operators to diagnose cache
> effectiveness,
> >>>> write amplification, and I/O pattern inefficiencies.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/co48G
> >>>>
> >>>> Please review the KIP and feel free to share your thoughts.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Sahil Devgon
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to