Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Hi all, Apologies for the back and forth on this issue, but while implementing the new API I've come around to thinking we should not return anything after all, and just leave it up to the user to determine if they need to retry the rebalance. Since I was the main (only) strong proponent of this

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Thanks all! This KIP passes with 3 binding votes (John, Bill, and Guozhang) and 3 non-binding votes (Navinder, Konstantine, Boyang, and Bruno). I'll call for review on a PR shortly. Sophie On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 12:25 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote: > Thanks! > > +1 (non-binding) > > Best, > Bruno

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Thanks! +1 (non-binding) Best, Bruno On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:57 AM Boyang Chen wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 4:45 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > +1 (binding). > > > > > > Guozhang > > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:29 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > > > Hi Sophie, > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

+1 (non-binding) On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 4:45 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > +1 (binding). > > > Guozhang > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:29 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > > > Hi Sophie, > > > > Thanks for the KIP, I left some comments on the DISCUSS thread. > > > > > > Guozhang > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 11,

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

+1 (binding). Guozhang On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 5:29 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Hi Sophie, > > Thanks for the KIP, I left some comments on the DISCUSS thread. > > > Guozhang > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 3:25 PM Bill Bejeck wrote: > >> Thanks for the KIP Sophie. >> >> It's a +1 (binding) for me

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Hi Sophie, Thanks for the KIP, I left some comments on the DISCUSS thread. Guozhang On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 3:25 PM Bill Bejeck wrote: > Thanks for the KIP Sophie. > > It's a +1 (binding) for me. > > -Bill > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:21 PM Konstantine Karantasis < > konstant...@confluent.i

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Thanks for the KIP Sophie. It's a +1 (binding) for me. -Bill On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 4:21 PM Konstantine Karantasis < konstant...@confluent.io> wrote: > The KIP reads quite well for me now and I think this feature will enable > even more efficient load balancing for specific use cases. > > I'm

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

The KIP reads quite well for me now and I think this feature will enable even more efficient load balancing for specific use cases. I'm also +1 (non-binding) - Konstantine On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:35 AM Navinder Brar wrote: > Thanks Sophie, much required. > +1 non-binding. > > > Sent from Yah

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Thanks Sophie, much required. +1 non-binding. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Tuesday, February 11, 2020, 10:33 PM, John Roesler wrote: Thanks Sophie, I'm +1 (binding) -John On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, at 20:54, Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Hey all, > > I'd like to start the voting on KIP-5

Re: [VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Thanks Sophie, I'm +1 (binding) -John On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, at 20:54, Sophie Blee-Goldman wrote: > Hey all, > > I'd like to start the voting on KIP-568. It proposes the new > Consumer#enforceRebalance API to facilitate triggering efficient rebalances. > > For reference, here is the KIP link ag

[VOTE] KIP-568: Explicit rebalance triggering on the Consumer

Hey all, I'd like to start the voting on KIP-568. It proposes the new Consumer#enforceRebalance API to facilitate triggering efficient rebalances. For reference, here is the KIP link again: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-568%3A+Explicit+rebalance+triggering+on+the+Consumer