I'm +0 (non-binding) on this now. I think the proposal here adds quite a lot of complexity to Kafka, makes building client libraries much harder, and is going to confuse users a lot. I'm also worried about this feature being hard to implement, and/or testing not being rigorous enough - Aphyr's Jepsen series shows how hard this kind of functionality is to get right in real world environments in the face of network failures. Those tests take hundreds of person-hours to conduct and analyze, and I hope this community will put in similar time in stabilizing this tricky feature before it reaches a released version.
However, exactly-once processing is very useful, and my non-binding reservations probably shouldn't hold the project back. On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:50 AM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello community, > > We have made a few changes based on the comments in this thread as well as > the DISCUSS thread. Summary of the changes can be found in the update > history (2017/02/03 and 2017/02/07) of the design doc: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Jqy_GjUGtdXJK94XGsEIK7CP1SnQGdp2eF > 0wSw9ra8/edit#heading=h.i8usz7jt7ms6 > > And details of the changes can be found here: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg66069.html > > > We'd like to solicit another round of voting for 72 hours due to these > changes, and people who have voted before on this thread are welcome to > re-review and vote again. Thanks! > > > Guozhang > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > (with additional authorization from Jason's note in the discussion > thread) > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Apurva Mehta <apu...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > > > The wiki has been updated with a section on authorization, as well a > > > summary of the message format changes. > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks Tom, we'll update the wiki to reflect all the movement on the > > > design > > > > document. Did you have a specific concern with the new ACLs? > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 6:49 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > That is a good point. During the discussion, it was agreed that > > changes > > > > to > > > > > public interfaces (message format, protocol, ACLs, etc.) would be > > > copied > > > > to > > > > > the wiki once the things had settled down, but it looks like that > > > hasn't > > > > > been done yet. I agree that it makes sense to do it before people > > vote > > > on > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Tom Crayford <tcrayf...@heroku.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > -1 (non-binding) > > > > > > > > > > > > I've been slow at keeping up with the KIP and the discussion > > thread. > > > > This > > > > > > is an exciting and quite complex new feature, which provides > great > > > new > > > > > > functionality. > > > > > > > > > > > > There's a thing I noticed missing from the KIP that's present in > > the > > > > > google > > > > > > doc - the doc talks about ACLs for TransactionalId. If those are > > > going > > > > to > > > > > > land with the KIP, I think they should be included in the KIP > > itself, > > > > as > > > > > > new ACLs are significant security changes. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Eno Thereska < > > > eno.there...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Excellent work and discussions! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eno > > > > > > > > On 2 Feb 2017, at 04:13, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We would like to start the voting process for KIP-98. The KIP > > can > > > > be > > > > > > > found > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP- > > > > > > > 98+-+Exactly+Once+Delivery+and+Transactional+Messaging > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussion thread can be found here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1jwZrr7HRHf?subj=+ > > > > > > > DISCUSS+KIP+98+Exactly+Once+Delivery+and+Transactional+ > Messaging > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > -- Guozhang > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > -- Guozhang >
