Re: [VOTE] KIP-82 Add Record Headers

+1 after the comprehensive discussion great to see this moving to a vote. On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Onur Karaman wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:35 AM, radai > wrote: > > > +1 from me. > > > > also - a more usable

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-109: Old Consumer Deprecation

Hi Ismael, What are the expected timelines we are talking about between the major releases? At LI we are expecting to have atleast 1 year between the old consumer deprecation and removal so we have enough time to upgrade all applications. The rollout to new consumer has hit many hurdles so hasn't

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-87 - Add Compaction Tombstone Flag

Is upping the magic byte to 2 needed? In your example say For broker api version at or above 0.10.2 the tombstone bit will be used for log compaction deletion. If the producerequest version is less than 0.10.2 and the message is null, the broker will up convert to set the tombstone bit on If the

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New committer: Jiangjie (Becket) Qin

Congratulations Becket!! Absolutely thrilled to hear this. Well deserved! regards renu On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Joel Koshy wrote: > The PMC for Apache Kafka has invited Jiangjie (Becket) Qin to join as a > committer and we are pleased to announce that he has

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-87 - Add Compaction Tombstone Flag

+1 @Magnus. It is also in line with traditional use of the magic field to indicate a change in the format of the message. Thus a change in the magic field indicates a different "schema" which in this case would reflect adding a new field, removing a field or changing the type of fields etc. The

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-68 Add a consumed log retention before log retention

Hi David This is a very timely KIP given the number of use cases in the streams processing pipeline than need consumed log retention management. Some questions that Becket and Dong asked just wanted to make sure are described in the KIP. 1. How is the configuration setup per topic to know what

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-82 - Add Record Headers

+1 Nacho, Radai, Mayuresh 1) yes for unordered keys. Given the expected number of headers is not that high linear searching is ok. The overhead of ordering and the dependence on client implementations makes it error prone. 2) yes on proposed key space. Adding structure makes it easier to manage

Status of KIP-68: Add a consumed log retention

Hi All, Wanted to find out more on the status of KIP-68. There are no details in the discussion thread and the pointers are not updated. Is this being actively worked on? This is clearly needed to support smarter and more cost effective retentions.

Re: Kafka KIP meeting Sep 13 at 11:00am PST

Hi Ismael Could you please add me to the invite. rtew...@linkedin.com regards Renu On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Ismael Juma wrote: > Hi, Everyone, > > We plan to have a Kafka KIP meeting this coming Tuesday at 11:00am PST. If > you plan to attend but haven't received