Hello Colin,
Thank you for the swift and informative reply! I will have a look at the
suggested tickets and pick up one of the free ones.
Best,
Christo
On Sunday, 19 June 2022, 22:46:41 BST, Colin McCabe
wrote:
Hi Christo NUKK,
We have been trying to label KRaft issues on JIRA with
Hi Christo NUKK,
We have been trying to label KRaft issues on JIRA with "kip-500". So you should
be able to do a search like this for them:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-13912?jql=project%20%3D%20KAFKA%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20kip-500%20AND%20statusCategory%20!%3D%20Done
In JQL
Hello!
I went through JIRA, GitHub and the mailing list, but I was not able to find a
list of developer tasks to be picked up for what is left to achieve feature
parity with Zookeeper mode. I will have spare bandwidth in the next month and
would like to contribute. I have touched
Hi José,
Yes, that matches my understanding.
I added a section on "bridge releases" to the KIP. This section basically
reiterates what we discussed in KIP-500, but it's good to have anyway.
best,
Colin
On Wed, May 18, 2022, at 14:49, José Armando García Sancio wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the KIP.
>The rationale for deprecating ZK in the 3.4 release is so that we can remove
>it in the 4.0 release. (In general, Kafka requires features to be deprecated
>for at least one release before they can be removed in the following major
>release.) During the
> Stretch clusters are possible with the KRaft architecture. For example,
if you had a cluster with nodes in us-west-1, us-west-2 and us-central-1,
you could put a KRaft controller node in each region. This is similar to
how with ZK you'd put a ZK node in each region.
Ah ha! TIL about
On Thu, May 5, 2022, at 15:57, Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Thanks Colin.
>
> I think we may need to update the KIP name to reflect the intent of the KIP
> and convey everything it’s about if all the 3 action items will be covered
> by the same KIP
>
> It contains three parts:
>
> Marking KRraft as
Hi Andrew,
Stretch clusters are possible with the KRaft architecture. For example, if you
had a cluster with nodes in us-west-1, us-west-2 and us-central-1, you could
put a KRaft controller node in each region. This is similar to how with ZK
you'd put a ZK node in each region.
best,
Colin
> Deprecating ZK Mode and
> Removing Zookeeper Mode
I'm excited about KRaft, but quick Q. I'm researching Kafka 'stretch'
cluster deployments, and as far as I can tell stretch clusters require
Zookeeper to function properly, is this correct? If so, we might want to
solve that before Deprecating
Thanks Colin.
I think we may need to update the KIP name to reflect the intent of the KIP
and convey everything it’s about if all the 3 action items will be covered
by the same KIP
It contains three parts:
Marking KRraft as Production Ready
Deprecating ZK Mode and
Removing Zookeeper Mode
Hi all,
Thanks for the comments. I agree that we should split out declaring KRaft going
production for new clusters from deprecating ZK. We can do the former in the
next release, 3.3, and the latter in the release after that, 3.4.
I also talked offline with some of the people working on
Yes, all features supported by zk mode will be available in kraft mode in
the 3.x series.
Ismael
On Wed, May 4, 2022, 5:28 PM Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Ismael,
>
> I like the timeline. However, does this or will this also account for
> features users rely on today in Zookeeper mode being available
Ismael,
I like the timeline. However, does this or will this also account for
features users rely on today in Zookeeper mode being available when
Zookeeper is dropped?
That’s my main concern
On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 8:12 PM Ismael Juma wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks for the KIP, this is
Hi Colin,
Thanks for the KIP, this is exciting. Trying to balance progress and
compatibility, how about the following?
1. 3.3 (~August 2022): kraft is production ready for new clusters
2. 3.4 (~December 2022/January 2023): migration from zk to kraft is
production ready and zk mode is deprecated
Thanks Colin for the update and clarification and the additional details
you added.
I second Igor's thoughts that we should not deprecate ZK before having
feature parity.
However, I think marking KRaft mode as production-ready is something that
can be done independent of the status of feature
Hi Colin,
It's very exciting to see KRaft ready for production!
I see the value of marking it ready for production even with the current
missing features.
However, I'm worried about marking ZK mode as deprecated before these missing
features are ready. It might be hard to estimate right now
On Tue, May 3, 2022, at 23:16, Colin McCabe wrote:
>
> To be clear, the proposal here is to have the bridge release be 3.4 and
> then move on to a ZK-free 4.0. With a 3.5 release as an option (but not
> requirement) if we can't finish everything in time after 3.4. So that
> would be two more
On Tue, May 3, 2022, at 19:32, Luke Chen wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> So exciting to see the KIP to mark the Kraft production ready!
>
> Just one comment: We should make sure the period between ZK deprecation
> (i.e. v3.4.0) to ZK removal (i.e. v4.0.0) is not too short.
> Do we have any expectation for
On Tue, May 3, 2022, at 20:48, Israel Ekpo wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> Thanks for this KIP. I am very excited to see the proposal.
>
> A lot in the community have been asking when KRaft mode will be ready and I
> think this KIP will provide a lot of the answers and guidance desperately
> needed.
>
>
Hi Colin,
Thanks for this KIP. I am very excited to see the proposal.
A lot in the community have been asking when KRaft mode will be ready and I
think this KIP will provide a lot of the answers and guidance desperately
needed.
Thanks for working on it.
I also have some of the questions from
Hi Colin,
So exciting to see the KIP to mark the Kraft production ready!
Just one comment: We should make sure the period between ZK deprecation
(i.e. v3.4.0) to ZK removal (i.e. v4.0.0) is not too short.
Do we have any expectation for the deprecation period?
After all, this is not a small
Hi all,
I've written a KIP for marking KRaft as production ready. Please take a look if
you have a chance:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/8xKhD
thanks,
Colin
22 matches
Mail list logo
