[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-20096?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18056050#comment-18056050
]
Matthias J. Sax commented on KAFKA-20096:
-----------------------------------------
Sure. – The key thing will be to check the system tests, and to find out why we
did not catch this, and maybe add (or extend an existing) system test, to
verify that the upgrade and downgrade with file format 5 works.
We might want to do two PRs; one docs PR for now, to quickly call out the file
format change. And a second one with the major work (and maybe additional doc
changes explaining the upgrade/downgrade path better – but we should only do
this, after we verified that it works as intended).
> RocksDB compatibility not documented
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-20096
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-20096
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: docs, streams, system tests
> Affects Versions: 4.0.0
> Reporter: Matthias J. Sax
> Priority: Critical
>
> With 4.0 release, we upgraded RocksDB from 7.9 to 9.7
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-15443) – however, we did miss
> that RocksDB introduces a file format version bump from version 5 to version
> 6 with RocksDB 8.6.
> While this does not impact the upgrade path, it does impact the downgrade
> path. This limitation is no documented though. – We should also investigate
> `RocksDBConfigSetter` which seems to allow to configure the used file-format
> version via `tableconfig.setFormVersion`.
> We should also double check system test coverage for upgrade/downgrade path
> with RocksDB – ideally we should catch such issue; seems there is some
> testing gap.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
