> On Jan 15, 2019, at 2:26 PM, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > > I think it makes sense to go back to use-cases again. So far, all of the > use-cases we discussed could be handled by pause and resume. So it makes > sense to try to figure out what the issue with those APIs is. Are they not > well-documented enough? Is there something higher-level we could build on > top to make them easier to use? > > It would be better to wait until a user comes forward and with a case where > priorities are needed, to implement them. Since then we would know more > about what the API should be, etc.
Hi Colin, I agree that the use-cases are important. Rather than wait though I took some initiative and posted the message below to the Kafka user list (Subject: Prioritized Topics for Kafka). Since yesterday there have been 6 replies containing 7 different use-cases and very positive feedback. Please review. https://lists.apache.org/list.html?us...@kafka.apache.org <https://lists.apache.org/list.html?us...@kafka.apache.org> At this point I feel like we have enough info and would like to try and work towards a vote or set the status of the KIP to dormant. Cheers, -- Nick > On Jan 16, 2019, at 9:51 PM, n...@afshartous.com wrote: > > Hi all, > > On the dev list we’ve been discussing a proposed new feature (prioritized > topics). In a nutshell, when consuming from a set of topics with assigned > priorities, consumption from lower-priority topics only occurs if there’s no > data flowing in from a higher-priority topic. > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-349%3A+Priorities+for+Source+Topics > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-349%3A+Priorities+for+Source+Topics><https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-349:+Priorities+for+Source+Topics > > <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-349:+Priorities+for+Source+Topics>> > > One question is are there use-cases for the proposed API. If you think this > would be useful and have use-cases in mind please reply with the use-cases. > > Its also possible to implement prioritization with the existing API by using > a combination of pausing, resuming, and local buffering. The question is > then does it make sense to introduce the proposed higher-level API to make > this easier ? > > The responses will be used as input to determine if we move ahead with the > proposal. Thanks in advance for input. > > Cheers, > -- > Nick
