Good idea, this will prevent a couple of headaches. Regards Patrik
> Am 13.06.2019 um 00:24 schrieb Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>: > > We want to make a small additional change and piggy-back it to this KIP. > > To exploit the new feature of AdmintClient in KafkaStreams, we want to > update the default value of Streams configuration parameter > `replication.factor` from `1` to `-1`. > > This config change will of course only go into 2.4 release. > > I updated the KIP accordingly and created > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8531 > > Let us know if there are any concerns. I don't think that we need to > revote base on this tiny change. > > > -Matthias > >> On 5/28/19 8:50 AM, Almog Gavra wrote: >> Hello everyone - the PR is out and ready to review! >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6728/ >> >>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:57 AM Almog Gavra <al...@confluent.io> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks everyone for the comments and discussion! Closing the voting out >>> for this KIP: >>> >>> * 4 Binding (Randall, Manikumar, Colin, Gwen) >>> * 2 Non-Binding (Ryanne, Mickael) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Almog >>> >>> >>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:55 AM Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 (binding) >>>> >>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 9:32 AM Almog Gavra <al...@confluent.io> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'm happy pulling it out into a separate KIP to target the discussion. >>>> This >>>>> one can just introduce the "default" constructor for no partitions or >>>>> replicas since we'll need that one whether or not we add the builder. >>>>> >>>>> Updated the KIP moving the builder to a section in "Rejected >>>> Alternatives - >>>>> Follow Up KIP" - @Randall since your +1 was for the KIP with builder I >>>> want >>>>> to make sure that is okay with you. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 9:14 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Given that there are still some open questions about the builder, >>>> maybe >>>>> we >>>>>> should put it in a separate KIP? >>>>>> >>>>>> best, >>>>>> Colin >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019, at 09:00, Ryanne Dolan wrote: >>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) for the core feature, but I could take or leave the >>>>>>> builder. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ryanne >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 10:43 AM Almog Gavra <al...@confluent.io> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> @Ismael - I agree that the methods are a little random. They were >>>>> just >>>>>>>> ported from what's currently in the connect builder. I think a >>>> better >>>>>>>> option might be to keep the connect builder around and have extend >>>>> from >>>>>>>> this builder, and make this builder only implement the "critical" >>>>>> methods >>>>>>>> (e.g. replicas/partitions/config). (cc Randall) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is passing optionals in the constructor something that's common in >>>>> AK? >>>>>> I >>>>>>>> think my preference would be toward the builder so that it's >>>> easier >>>>> to >>>>>>>> extend as Randall mentioned. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Almog >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 8:17 AM Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The current builder includes random methods like >>>>>> uncleanLeaderElection. >>>>>>>>> That doesn't make sense to me since it's a topic config (and we >>>>> don't >>>>>>>>> include methods for other topic configs). Also, I'm not sure >>>> about >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> naming convention, should we have a `with` prefix? It would be >>>> good >>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> check existing builders in `clients` if any exist for what >>>> they're >>>>>> doing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If we didn't add a builder, another option would be a single new >>>>>>>>> constructor: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> public NewTopic(String name, Optional<Integer> numPartitions, >>>>>>>>> Optional<Short> replicationFactor) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ismael >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 3:38 PM Almog Gavra <al...@confluent.io> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks Colin! Since the discussion around the builder is here >>>>> I'll >>>>>> copy >>>>>>>>>> over my comment from the discuss thread: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> If we want the flexibility that the builder provides we would >>>>> need >>>>>> to >>>>>>>> add >>>>>>>>>> three constructors: >>>>>>>>>> - no partitions/replicas >>>>>>>>>> - just partitions >>>>>>>>>> - just replicas >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I see good use cases for the first two - the third (just >>>>> replicas) >>>>>>>> seems >>>>>>>>>> less necessary but complicates the API a bit (you have to >>>>>> differentiate >>>>>>>>>> NewTopic(int) with NewTopic(short) or something like that). If >>>>>> we're >>>>>>>>> happy >>>>>>>>>> with a KIP that covers just the first two then I can remove >>>> the >>>>>> builder >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> simplify things. Otherwise, I think the builder is an >>>> important >>>>>>>> addition. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 2:50 PM Colin McCabe < >>>> cmcc...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 (binding). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Re: the builder discussion. I don't feel strongly either >>>> way-- >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> builder sketched out in the KIP looks reasonable, but I can >>>>> also >>>>>>>>>> understand >>>>>>>>>>> Ismael's argument for keeping the KIP minimal. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> best, >>>>>>>>>>> Colin >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019, at 08:09, Randall Hauch wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm fine with simplifying the KIP by removing the Builder >>>>>> (which >>>>>>>>> seems >>>>>>>>>>>> ancillary), or keeping the KIP as-is. I'll wait to vote >>>> until >>>>>> Almog >>>>>>>>>> says >>>>>>>>>>>> which way he'd like to proceed. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 9, 2019 at 9:45 AM Ismael Juma < >>>>> ism...@juma.me.uk> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Almog, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a Builder seems unrelated to this change. Do we >>>> need >>>>>> it? >>>>>>>>> Given >>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> imminent KIP deadline, I'd keep it simple and just have >>>> the >>>>>>>>>> constructor >>>>>>>>>>>>> with just the name parameter. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 1:58 AM Mickael Maison < >>>>>>>>>>> mickael.mai...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was planning to write a KIP for the exact same >>>> feature! >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 (non binding) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the KIP >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 7:24 PM Almog Gavra < >>>>>> al...@confluent.io >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello Everyone! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kicking off the voting for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-464%3A+Defaults+for+AdminClient%23createTopic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can see discussion thread here (please respond >>>> with >>>>>>>>>>> suggestions on >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thread): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c0adfd2457e5984be7471fe6ade8a94d52c647356c81c039445d6b34@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Almog >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Gwen Shapira* >>>> Product Manager | Confluent >>>> 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap >>>> Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog >>>> <http://www.confluent.io/blog> >>>> >>> >> >
