TEJAL ADSUL created KAFKA-8592:
--
Summary: Broker Dynamic Configuration fails to resolve variables
as per KIP-421
Key: KAFKA-8592
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8592
Project: Kafka
TEJAL ADSUL created KAFKA-8426:
--
Summary: KIP 421 Bug: ConfigProvider configs param inconsistent
with KIP-297
Key: KAFKA-8426
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8426
Project: Kafka
TEJAL ADSUL created KAFKA-8425:
--
Summary: KIP 421 Bug: Modifying Immutable Originals Map results in
Java exception
Key: KAFKA-8425
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-8425
Project: Kafka
tly:
> > >
> > > Binding: +2 (Colin, Gwen)
> > > Non-binding: +2 (Randall, Dongjin)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dongjin
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 10:26 AM TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Folk
Hi all,
This KIP passes with three +1 (binding) - thanks Colin, Randall and Gwen!
For those interested, feel free to check out and join the ongoing PR review
here: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6467
Thanks,
Tejal
On 2019/04/22 17:26:05, TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
;
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019, at 15:02, TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > As we have reached a consensus on the design, I would like to start a
> > vote for KIP-421. Below are the links for this proposal:
> >
> > KIP Link:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/
Hi All,
As we have reached a consensus on the design, I would like to start a vote for
KIP-421. Below are the links for this proposal:
KIP Link:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=100829515
DiscussionThread:
it dint add anything.
Please could you'll review the KIP and let me know if it has addressed your
concerns and any other feedback.
Thanks,
Tejal
On 2019/04/17 23:34:37, TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback Colin. And agree we should enable it for all the
> components as thi
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, at 07:49, TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
> >
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > By default we are enabling this feature only Connect. All the other
> > components can enable or disable the feature as needed.
>
> Hi Tejal,
>
> I believe we should
ig providers defined in the same configs. Instead, automatic resolution
> must be explicitly enabled/used by the subclass for all components except
> Connect’s worker configurations.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Randall
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 7:49 AM TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
>
>
by the user
using the Admin Client. For static configs we dont perform any reloading and
happens only at the construction time.
Thanks,
Tejal
On 2019/04/17 14:36:33, TEJAL ADSUL wrote:
> Hi Rajini,
>
> The user wont have the ability to choose whether config value should be
> enabled/d
Hi Rajini,
The user wont have the ability to choose whether config value should be
enabled/disabled. Its enable/disabled per component by hardcoding the value. I
have documented your recommendations in the compatibility sections.
Thanks,
Tejal
Hi All,
I have updated the KIP to address the comments in the discussion. I have added
the flow as to how dynamic config values will be resolved. Please could
you’ll review the updated changes and let me know your feedback.
Thanks,
Tejal
On 2019/03/21 20:38:54, Tejal Adsul wrote:
> I h
Hi All,
I have updated the KIP to address the comments in the discussion. I have added
the flow as to how dynamic config values will be resolved. Please could
you’ll review the updated changes and let me know your feedback.
Thanks,
Tejal
On 2019/03/21 20:36:24, Tejal Adsul wrote:
> @Co
Hi All,
I would like to start the vote thread for KIP-421: Support resolving
externalized secrets in AbstractConfig.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-421%3A+Support+resolving+externalized+secrets+in+AbstractConfig
Thanks!
Regards,
Tejal
orConfig etc.)
> will>
>be extended to optionally use the new AbstractConfig constructors?>
>
> Regards,>
>
> Rajini>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 5:49 PM Tejal Adsul wrote:>
>
> > Hi Folks,>
> >>
> > I have accommo
KIP-421
> functionality and when you would want to disable it. What is the purpose of
> making it possible to disable this? Do you have examples of cases where we
> would use it and cases where we would not? Would the broker use this
> functionality?>
>
> best,>
>
> > term>
> > > > intended benefit of this improvement. We should definitely have a
> > > > follow>
> > > up>
> > > > to this that deals with the subscriptions, but I think the current
> > > > scope>
>
On 2019/01/24 18:54:13, Rajini Sivaram wrote:
> Hi Tejal,
>
> Thanks for the KIP. I have a couple of comments/questions.
>
> It sounds like we are addressing password protection for clients, Connect
> etc., but not for brokers, even though the changes proposed are in classes
> common to
On 2019/01/24 17:26:02, Andy Coates wrote:
> I'm wondering why we're rejected changing AbstractConfig to automatically
> resolve the variables?
>
> > 1. Change AbstractConfig to *automatically* resolve variables of the form
> specified in KIP-297. This was rejected because it would change
Hi Colin,
If the configProvider is not configured we will return the unresolved value as
is, so from the example the value returned will be
${file:/path/to/variables.properties:foo.bar} instead of the resolved value.
We currently wont be supporting mechanism to update via subscribe so it
TEJAL ADSUL created KAFKA-7847:
--
Summary: KIP-421: Support resolving externalized secrets in
AbstractConfig
Key: KAFKA-7847
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7847
Project: Kafka
TEJAL ADSUL created KAFKA-7846:
--
Summary: KIP-421: Support resolving externalized secrets in
AbstractConfig
Key: KAFKA-7846
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7846
Project: Kafka
Hi,
I work at Confluent. Please could you grant me permission to create a KIP for
apache kafka, I wanted to propose a change to AbstractConfig in Kafka.
Following are my details
Full NameTEJAL ADSUL
emailte...@confluent.io
ID: tejal
Thanks,
Tejal
24 matches
Mail list logo
