Any other votes or comments? Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:45 AM xiongqi wu <xiongq...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, more votes and code review. > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:37 PM Brett Rann <br...@zendesk.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> +1 (non binding) from on 0 then, and on the KIP. >> >> Where do we go from here? More votes? >> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 5:34 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, at 11:44, xiongqi wu wrote: >> > > Thank you for comments. I will use '0' for now. >> > > >> > > If we create topics through admin client in the future, we might >> perform >> > > some useful checks. (but the assumption is all brokers in the same >> > cluster >> > > have the same default configurations value, otherwise,it might still >> be >> > > tricky to do such cross validation check.) >> > >> > This isn't something that we might do in the future-- this is something >> we >> > are doing now. We already have Create Topic policies which are enforced >> by >> > the broker. Check KIP-108 and KIP-170 for details. This is one of the >> > motivations for getting rid of direct ZK access-- making sure that these >> > policies are applied. >> > >> > I agree that having different configurations on different brokers can be >> > confusing and frustrating . That's why more configurations are being >> made >> > dynamic using KIP-226. Dynamic configurations are stored centrally in >> ZK, >> > so they are the same on all brokers (modulo propagation delays). In any >> > case, this is a general issue, not specific to "create topics". >> > >> > cheers, >> > Colin >> > >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > >> > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:15 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > I don't have a strong opinion. But I think we should probably be >> > > > consistent with how segment.ms works, and just use 0. >> > > > >> > > > best, >> > > > Colin >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018, at 21:19, Brett Rann wrote: >> > > > > OK thanks for that clarification. I see why you're uncomfortable >> > with 0 >> > > > now. >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm not really fussed. I just prefer consistency in configuration >> > > > options. >> > > > > >> > > > > Personally I lean towards treating 0 and 1 similarly in that >> > scenario, >> > > > > because it favours the person thinking about setting the >> > configurations, >> > > > > and a person doesn't care about a 1ms edge case especially when >> the >> > > > context >> > > > > is the true minimum is tied to the log cleaner cadence. >> > > > > >> > > > > Introducing 0 to mean "disabled" because there is some uniquness >> in >> > > > > segment.ms not being able to be set to 0, reduces configuration >> > > > consistency >> > > > > in favour of capturing a MS gap in an edge case that nobody would >> > ever >> > > > > notice. For someone to understand why everywhere else -1 is used >> to >> > > > > disable, but here 0 is used, they would need to learn about >> > segment.ms >> > > > > having a 1ms minimum and then after learning would think "who >> cares >> > about >> > > > > 1ms?" in this context. I would anyway :) >> > > > > >> > > > > my 2c anyway. Will again defer to majority. Curious which way >> Colin >> > falls >> > > > > now. >> > > > > >> > > > > Don't want to spend more time on this though, It's well into >> > > > bikeshedding >> > > > > territory now. :) >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:31 PM xiongqi wu <xiongq...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > I want to honor the minimum value of segment.ms (which is 1ms) >> to >> > > > force >> > > > > > roll an active segment. >> > > > > > So if we set "max.compaction.lag.ms" any value > 0, the >> minimum of >> > > > > > max.compaction.lag.ms and segment.ms will be used to seal an >> > active >> > > > > > segment. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > If we set max.compaction.lag.ms to 0, the current >> implementation >> > will >> > > > > > treat it as disabled. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It is a little bit weird to treat max.compaction.lag=0 the same >> as >> > > > > > max.compaction.lag=1. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > There might be a reason why we set the minimum of segment.ms >> to 1, >> > > > and I >> > > > > > don't want to break this assumption. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 7:54 PM Brett Rann >> > <br...@zendesk.com.invalid> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > You're rolling a new segment if the condition is met right? So >> > I'm >> > > > > > > struggling to understand the relevance of segment.ms here. >> > Maybe an >> > > > > > > example >> > > > > > > would help my understanding: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > segment.ms=9999999 >> > > > > > > *min.cleanable.dirty.ratio=1* >> > > > > > > max.compaction.lag.ms=1 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > When a duplicate message comes in, after 1ms the topic should >> be >> > > > eligible >> > > > > > > for compaction when the log compaction thread gets around to >> > > > evaluating >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > topic. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > if we have >> > > > > > > segment.ms=9999999 >> > > > > > > *min.cleanable.dirty.ratio=1* >> > > > > > > max.compaction.lag.ms=0 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > When a duplicate message comes in, after 0ms the topic should >> be >> > > > eligible >> > > > > > > for compaction when the log compaction thread gets around to >> > > > evaluating >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > topic. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In both of those cases the change would mean a new segment is >> > rolled >> > > > so >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > new message would be part of the compaction task. 0 and 1 are >> > > > practically >> > > > > > > the same meaning since neither is providing an actual >> guarantee >> > at >> > > > such >> > > > > > low >> > > > > > > MS settings, but effectively tying it to both the frequency of >> > the >> > > > log >> > > > > > > cleaner running and the priority of the given topic being the >> > highest >> > > > > > > priority of all topics that are evaluated for cleaning on the >> > next >> > > > cycle. >> > > > > > > You've captured that nuance with careful "skipped" wording in >> > the KIP >> > > > > > > here "controls >> > > > > > > the max time interval a message/segment can be skipped for log >> > > > > > compaction". >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > How is 0 different to 1, practically? And how is it relating >> to >> > > > > > segment.ms >> > > > > > > ? >> > > > > > > Is it that you're proposing to have 0 mean "use segment.ms >> > > > instead?" as >> > > > > > a >> > > > > > > kind of third option? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:34 AM xiongqi wu < >> xiongq...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > To make it clear, >> > > > > > > > I don't against using -1 as disabled, but we need to come up >> > with >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > meaning of "0". >> > > > > > > > If "0" means immediate compaction, but the actual compaction >> > lag >> > > > will >> > > > > > be >> > > > > > > > segment.ms. >> > > > > > > > It has longer lag than setting the value to be half of >> > segment.ms. >> > > > > > > > We cannot provide "0" as max compaction lag. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Here are two options. >> > > > > > > > Option 1: >> > > > > > > > Keep 0 as disabled >> > > > > > > > Option 2: >> > > > > > > > -1 (disabled), 0 (max compaction lag = segment.ms), and >> > others. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 5:49 PM Brett Rann >> > > > <br...@zendesk.com.invalid> >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > -1 is consistent as "special" with these settings for >> > example: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > log.retention.bytes >> > > > > > > > > socket.received.buffer.bytes >> > > > > > > > > socket.send.buffer.bytes >> > > > > > > > > queued.max.request.bytes >> > > > > > > > > retention.bytes >> > > > > > > > > retention.ms >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > and acks. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Where it may mean no limit, use OS defaults, max (acks), >> > etc. I >> > > > don't >> > > > > > > see >> > > > > > > > > much convention of 0 meaning those things. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > There are some NULLs but it seems convetion there is NULL >> is >> > used >> > > > > > where >> > > > > > > > > there's another setting in the hierarchy that would be >> used >> > > > instead. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 10:42 AM Brett Rann < >> > br...@zendesk.com> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > If segment.ms can't be set to 0, then we're not being >> > > > consistent >> > > > > > > > > > by using 0 for this new setting? I throw out -1 for >> > > > consideration >> > > > > > > > > > again :) >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 10:03 AM xiongqi wu < >> > > > xiongq...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Thanks. I will document after PR is merged. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> BTW, Kafka enforce the minimum of "segment.ms" to 1, >> we >> > > > cannot >> > > > > > set >> > > > > > > " >> > > > > > > > > >> segment.ms" to 0. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> I also updated the title of this KIP. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 4:34 PM Brett Rann >> > > > > > <br...@zendesk.com.invalid >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > I withdraw my comments on -1 since i'm in the >> minority. >> > :) >> > > > Can >> > > > > > we >> > > > > > > > > >> > make sure 0 gets documented as meaning disabled here: >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs> >> > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs>> >> > > > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs> >> > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs> >> > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs>> >> > > > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs> >> > > > > > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs >> > <https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#brokerconfigs>>>> ? >> > > > > > > > > >> > And while there it would be good if segment.ms is >> > > > documented >> > > > > > > > > >> > that 0 is disabled too. (there's some hierarchy of >> > configs >> > > > for >> > > > > > > that >> > > > > > > > > too >> > > > > > > > > >> > if its not set and null for others means disabled!) >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:44 AM xiongqi wu < >> > > > xiongq...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > If we use 0 to indicate immediate compaction, the >> > > > compaction >> > > > > > lag >> > > > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > >> > > determined by segment.ms in worst case. If >> segment.ms >> > is >> > > > 24 >> > > > > > > > hours, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > "immediate compaction" is a weaker guarantee than >> > setting >> > > > any >> > > > > > > > value >> > > > > > > > > >> less >> > > > > > > > > >> > > than 24 hours. By the definition of "max compaction >> > lag", >> > > > we >> > > > > > > > cannot >> > > > > > > > > >> have >> > > > > > > > > >> > > zero lag. So I use 0 to indicate "disable". >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 8:34 AM Colin McCabe < >> > > > > > cmcc...@apache.org >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018, at 22:11, Brett Rann wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > That's a fair point. We should make 0 = >> > disable, to >> > > > be >> > > > > > > > > >> consistent >> > > > > > > > > >> > > with >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > the other settings. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > -1 is used elsewhere for disable and when >> seeing >> > it >> > > > in a >> > > > > > > > config >> > > > > > > > > >> it's >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > clear >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > that it's a special meaning. 0 doesn't have to >> > mean >> > > > > > instant, >> > > > > > > > it >> > > > > > > > > >> just >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > means >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > as quickly as possible. I don't think 0 is >> > intuitive >> > > > for >> > > > > > > > > disabled >> > > > > > > > > >> and >> > > > > > > > > >> > > it >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > will be confusing. I wasn't aware segment.ms=0 >> == >> > > > > > disabled, >> > > > > > > > > but I >> > > > > > > > > >> > > think >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > that is also unintuitive. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > I think there is an argument for keeping these >> two >> > > > > > > > configurations >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > consistent, since they are so similar. I agree >> that >> > 0 >> > > > was an >> > > > > > > > > >> > unfortunate >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > choice., >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > best, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Colin >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 11:38 AM Colin McCabe < >> > > > > > > > > cmcc...@apache.org> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018, at 17:47, xiongqi wu >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Colin, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thank you for comments. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > see my inline reply below. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 5:24 PM Colin >> McCabe < >> > > > > > > > > >> cmcc...@apache.org> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi Xiongqi, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Thanks for this KIP. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The name seems a bit ambiguous. Our >> > compaction >> > > > > > > policies >> > > > > > > > > are >> > > > > > > > > >> > > already >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > time-based, after all. It seems like this >> > > > change is >> > > > > > > > > focused >> > > > > > > > > >> > > around >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > adding >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > a “max.compaction.lag.ms." Perhaps the >> KIP >> > > > title >> > > > > > > should >> > > > > > > > > be >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > something >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > like "add maximum compaction lag time"? >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > ==========> sure. I will change the >> title. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > The active segment is forced to roll when >> > > > either " >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > max.compaction.lag.ms" >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > or "segment.ms" (log.roll.ms and >> > > > log.roll.hours) >> > > > > > > has >> > > > > > > > > >> > reached. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > If the max.compaction.lag.ms is low, it >> > seems >> > > > like >> > > > > > > > > segments >> > > > > > > > > >> > will >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > be >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > rolled very frequently. This can be a >> > source of >> > > > > > > problems >> > > > > > > > > in >> > > > > > > > > >> the >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > cluster, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > since creating many different small log >> > segments >> > > > > > > > consumes >> > > > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > > > >> > huge >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > amount of >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > cluster resources. Therefore, I would >> > suggest >> > > > > > adding a >> > > > > > > > > >> > > broker-level >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > configuration which allows us to set a >> > minimum >> > > > value >> > > > > > > for >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > max.compaction.lag.ms. If we let users >> set >> > it >> > > > on a >> > > > > > > > > >> per-topic >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > basis, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > someone could set a value of 1 ms or >> > something, >> > > > and >> > > > > > > > cause >> > > > > > > > > >> > chaos. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > =========> this applies to segment.ms as >> > well. >> > > > > > Today >> > > > > > > > > users >> > > > > > > > > >> can >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > set " >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > segment.ms" to a very low value, and >> cause a >> > > > frequent >> > > > > > > > > >> rolling of >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > active >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > segments. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Xiongqi, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > I agree that this is an existing problem with >> > > > > > segment.ms. >> > > > > > > > > >> However, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > that >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > doesn't mean that we shouldn't fix it. As you >> > noted, >> > > > > > there >> > > > > > > > > will >> > > > > > > > > >> be >> > > > > > > > > >> > > more >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > interest in these topic-level retention >> > settings as >> > > > a >> > > > > > > result >> > > > > > > > > of >> > > > > > > > > >> > GDPR. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > It >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > seems likely that pre-existing problems will >> > cause >> > > > more >> > > > > > > > > trouble. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > The fix seems relatively straightforward >> here -- >> > > > add a >> > > > > > > > > >> broker-level >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > minimum segment.ms that overrides per-topic >> > > > minimums. >> > > > > > We >> > > > > > > > can >> > > > > > > > > >> also >> > > > > > > > > >> > > fail >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > with a helpful error message when someone >> > attempts >> > > > to >> > > > > > set >> > > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > >> > invalid >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > configuration. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In my option, the minimum of " >> > > > max.compaction.lag.ms" >> > > > > > > > should >> > > > > > > > > >> be >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > based on the minimum of "segment.ms". >> Since >> > > > today the >> > > > > > > > > >> minimum of >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > segment.ms >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > is 1, "max.compaction.lag.ms" also starts >> > with >> > > > 1. "0" >> > > > > > > > means >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > disable. I >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > can use -1 as disable, but it is hard to >> > define >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > meaning >> > > > > > > > > >> of 0 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > because >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > we >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > cannot just roll the active segment >> > immediately. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > That's a fair point. We should make 0 = >> > disable, to >> > > > be >> > > > > > > > > >> consistent >> > > > > > > > > >> > > with >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > other settings. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > best, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > Colin >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > -- Note that an alternative configuration >> > is to >> > > > use >> > > > > > -1 >> > > > > > > > as >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > "disabled" >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > and >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 0 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > as "immediate compaction". Because >> > compaction >> > > > lag >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > still >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > determined >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > based on min.compaction.lag and how >> long >> > to >> > > > roll >> > > > > > an >> > > > > > > > > active >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > segment, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > actual lag for compaction is >> undetermined >> > if >> > > > we >> > > > > > use >> > > > > > > > "0". >> > > > > > > > > >> On >> > > > > > > > > >> > the >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > other >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > hand, we can already set >> > > > > > "min.cleanable.dirty.ratio" >> > > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > > > >> > achieve >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > the >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > same >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > goal. So here we choose "0" as >> "disabled". >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I would prefer -1 to be the invalid >> setting. >> > > > > > Treating >> > > > > > > 0 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > differently >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > than >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 1 seems strange to me. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > =====> see my previous comment, I am not >> > > > strongly >> > > > > > > > against, >> > > > > > > > > >> but >> > > > > > > > > >> > 0 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > is >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not a >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > valid configuration in my option. So I use >> > "0" as >> > > > > > > disabled >> > > > > > > > > >> state. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > best, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Colin >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018, at 15:04, xiongqi wu >> > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Let's VOTE for this KIP. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > KIP: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> < >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > < >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> < >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > < >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> < >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > < >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> < >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>> >> > > > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354> >> > > > > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354 >> > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-354>>>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > %3A+Time-based+log+compaction+policy >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Implementation: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>> >> > > > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611> >> > > > > > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611 >> > <https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5611>>>>>> >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Xiongqi (Wesley) Wu >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > -- >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Brett Rann >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Senior DevOps Engineer >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Zendesk International Ltd >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > 395 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Mobile: +61 (0) 418 826 017 >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Brett Rann >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Senior DevOps Engineer >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Zendesk International Ltd >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > 395 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Mobile: +61 (0) 418 826 017 >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Brett Rann >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Senior DevOps Engineer >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Zendesk International Ltd >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 395 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Mobile: +61 (0) 418 826 017 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > >> >
