[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16414?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17830241#comment-17830241
]
Chia-Ping Tsai commented on KAFKA-16414:
----------------------------------------
[~brandboat] thanks for opening this jira
I'm +1 to include active segment due to following benefits:
1. consistent
2. straightforward: the active segment is a part of "partition", so we should
not exclude the active segment when checking the retention size
> Inconsistent active segment expiration behavior between retention.ms and
> retention.bytes
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-16414
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16414
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 3.6.1
> Reporter: Kuan Po Tseng
> Assignee: Kuan Po Tseng
> Priority: Major
>
> This is a follow up issue on KAFKA-16385.
> Currently, there's a difference between how retention.ms and retention.bytes
> handle active segment expiration:
> - retention.ms always expire active segment when max segment timestamp
> matches the condition.
> - retention.bytes only expire active segment when retention.bytes is
> configured to zero.
> The behavior should be either rotate active segments for both retention
> configurations or none at all.
> For more details, see
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16385?focusedCommentId=17829682&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17829682
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
