On 3/24/15, 1:34 PM, "Guozhang Wang" <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>+1, let's just start a new thread for this. > >On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Joel Koshy <jjkosh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Actually, since there are already votes on this and the KIP has >> changed a bit we should cancel this and start a new thread. >> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Jiangjie Qin >> <j...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: >> > Push up the thread for voting after discussion on the KIP hangout. >> > >> > On 3/19/15, 9:03 PM, "Jiangjie Qin" <j...@linkedin.com> wrote: >> > >> >>We had some additional discussions on the discussion thread. Pushing >>up >> >>this thread to resume voting. >> >> >> >>On 3/11/15, 8:47 PM, "Jay Kreps" <jay.kr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >>>Yeah guys, I'd like to second that. I'd really really love to get the >> >>>quality of these to the point where we could broadly solicit user >>input >> >>>and >> >>>use them as a permanent document of the alternatives and rationale. >> >>> >> >>>I know it is a little painful to have process, but I think we all saw >> >>>what >> >>>happened to the previous clients as public interfaces so I really >>really >> >>>really want us to just be incredibly thoughtful and disciplined as we >> >>>make >> >>>changes. I think we all want to avoid another "client rewrite". >> >>> >> >>>To second Joe's question in a more specific way, I think an >>alternative >> I >> >>>don't see considered to give close() a bounded time is just to >>enforce >> >>>the >> >>>request time on the client side, which will cause all requests to be >> >>>failed >> >>>after the request timeout expires. This was the same behavior as for >> >>>flush. >> >>>In the case where the user just wants to ensure close doesn't block >> >>>forever >> >>>I think that may be sufficient? >> >>> >> >>>So one alternative might be to just do that request timeout feature >>and >> >>>add >> >>>a new producer config that is something like >> >>> abort.on.failure=false >> >>>which causes the producer to hard exit if it can't send a request. >>Which >> >>>I >> >>>think is closer to what you want, with this just being a way to >> implement >> >>>that behavior. >> >>> >> >>>I'm not sure if this is better or worse, but we should be sure >>before we >> >>>make the change. >> >>> >> >>>I also have a concern about >> >>> producer.close(0, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS) >> >>>not meaning close with a timeout of 0 ms. >> >>> >> >>>I realize this exists in other java apis, but it is so confusing it >>even >> >>>confused us into having that recent producer bug because of course >>all >> >>>the >> >>>other numbers mean "wait that long". >> >>> >> >>>I'd propose >> >>> close()--block until all completed >> >>> close(0, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)--block for 0 ms >> >>> close(5, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)--block for 5 ms >> >>> close(-1, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS)--error because blocking for >>negative >> >>>ms >> >>>would mean completing in the past :-) >> >>> >> >>>-Jay >> >>> >> >>>On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Joe Stein <joe.st...@stealth.ly> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>>> Could the KIP confluence please have updated the discussion thread >> >>>>link, >> >>>> thanks... could you also remove the template boilerplate at the top >> >>>>"*This >> >>>> page is meant as a template ..*" so we can capture it for the >>release >> >>>> cleanly. >> >>>> >> >>>> Also I don't really/fully understand how this is different than >> >>>> flush(time); close() and why close has its own timeout also? >> >>>> >> >>>> Lastly, what is the forceClose flag? This isn't documented in the >> >>>>public >> >>>> interface so it isn't clear how to completely use the feature just >>by >> >>>> reading the KIP. >> >>>> >> >>>> ~ Joe Stein >> >>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> >>>> >> >>>> http://www.stealth.ly >> >>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >> >>>> >> >>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Guozhang Wang >><wangg...@gmail.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> > +1 (binding) >> >>>> > >> >>>> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Jiangjie Qin >> >>>><j...@linkedin.com.invalid >> >>>> > >> >>>> > wrote: >> >>>> > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> >>>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-15+-+Add+a+close+m >> >>>>e >> >>>>thod+with+a+timeout+in+the+producer >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > -- >> >>>> > -- Guozhang >> >>>> > >> >>>> >> >> >> > >> > > > >-- >-- Guozhang
