Hi Ismael,

That is a good suggestion. We did not plan to move the design to a wiki,
but I think it is valuable to move at least the message format and RPC
changes to the wiki. We shall do so once the design is close to final so
that we do not have to edit multiple places as we iterate.

Thanks,
Apurva

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote:

> Thanks for submitting this KIP as it includes important improvements to
> Kafka's semantics. I will send a follow-up with more detailed feedback, but
> I have a process question in the meantime: is there a plan to move part or
> all of the Google Doc content to the wiki? At least protocol and message
> format changes should be in the wiki, in my opinion (Google Docs are not as
> discoverable, it's harder to track changes, not hosted on Apache Infra,
> etc.).
>
> Thanks,
> Ismael
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have just created KIP-98 to enhance Kafka with exactly once delivery
> > semantics:
> >
> > *https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > 98+-+Exactly+Once+Delivery+and+Transactional+Messaging
> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > 98+-+Exactly+Once+Delivery+and+Transactional+Messaging>*
> >
> > This KIP adds a transactional messaging mechanism along with an
> idempotent
> > producer implementation to make sure that 1) duplicated messages sent
> from
> > the same identified producer can be detected on the broker side, and 2) a
> > group of messages sent within a transaction will atomically be either
> > reflected and fetchable to consumers or not as a whole.
> >
> > The above wiki page provides a high-level view of the proposed changes as
> > well as summarized guarantees. Initial draft of the detailed
> implementation
> > design is described in this Google doc:
> >
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Jqy_GjUGtdXJK94XGsEIK7CP1SnQGdp2eF
> > 0wSw9ra8
> >
> >
> > We would love to hear your comments and suggestions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -- Guozhang
> >
>

Reply via email to