Hello Murali, thanks for your thoughtful feedback.

mb0: Thanks for pointing this out, the observation is correct. I added a
sentence under Proposed Changes to clarify that this KIP only targets the
3.9 development branch.

mb1: There is some potential, yes, as it can be incorrectly provided when
provisioning a node with version 4.0+, i.e. that is not meant to go through
KRaft migration. However, I think the documentation as proposed already is
sufficient to steer users right with regards to this. See also the
reference PR, that adds a clear statement that the flag shall not be used
beyond KRaft migration.

BR,
Anton

Den tors 6 aug. 2026 kl 23:23 skrev Muralidhar Basani via dev <
[email protected]>:

> Hi Anton,
> Thanks for the KIP. It closes a real gap for 3.9 migrations.
>
> I have a couple of minor comments.
>
> mb0 - My understanding is this can only ship on 3.9.x since ZK migration is
> removed on 4.0+. Maybe worth adding it to the KIP in the scope/target
> section.
>
> mb1 - Is there a possibility of misusing the flag
> `--zk-rollback-compatible` (for ex, applying it on a non-migration cluster
> or after finalization, then we see V0 meta props.) It may be better to add
> some guidance in the KIP.
>
> Thanks,
> Murali
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2026 at 12:18 PM Anton Agestam via dev <
> [email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I would like to start the discussion for KIP-1362: Add a
> > rollback-compatible storage format option for KRaft migration.
> >
> > KIP:
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/spaces/KAFKA/pages/440303727/KIP-1362+Add+a+rollback-compatible+storage+format+option+for+KRaft+migration
> > Jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-20762
> > PR/reference implementation: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/22751
> >
> > In summary: this KIP proposes closing a current gap, where the ability to
> > do rollback of an ongoing KRaft migration breaks when cluster member
> nodes
> > are replaced. The proposed solution is to add a CLI flag to the storage
> > formatting tool that causes the resulting storage to not break when
> rolled
> > back.
> >
> > I'm looking forward to feedback on this proposal.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Anton
> >
> > --
> > [image: Aiven] <https://www.aiven.io/>
> > *Anton Agestam* (he/him or they/them)
> > Software Engineer, *Aiven*
> > [email protected]   |   +46 704 486 289
> > aiven.io <https://www.aiven.io/>   |
> > <https://www.facebook.com/aivencloud>
> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiven/>    <
> https://twitter.com/aiven_io
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to