Yes that's the plan!
____
From: Mike Freyberger
Sent: Saturday, March 9, 2019 10:04 AM
To: dev@kafka.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-345: Reduce multiple consumer rebalances by
specifying member id
Hi Boyang,
Is th
How to you handle reassignment and state movement? Curious to see if we
could improve Kafka Streams :)
-Matthias
On 4/30/19 3:09 AM, Mike Freyberger wrote:
> In light of KIP-429, I think there will be an increased demand for sticky
assignors. So, I'd like to r
on the overall idea and the proposed
implementation.
Thanks,
Mike
On 6/20/18, 5:47 PM, "Mike Freyberger" wrote:
Matthias,
Thanks for the feedback. For our use case, we have some complexities that
make using the existing Streams API more complicated than using the Kafka
Hi Boyang,
Is this work targeted for Kafka 2.3? I am eager to use this new feature.
Thanks,
Mike Freyberger
On 12/21/18, 1:21 PM, "Mayuresh Gharat" wrote:
Hi Boyang,
Regarding "However, we shall still attempt to remove the member static info
if the given `me
+1 (non binding)
On 12/4/18, 9:43 AM, "Patrick Williams" wrote:
Pls take me off this VOTE list
Best,
Patrick Williams
Sales Manager, UK & Ireland, Nordics & Israel
StorageOS
+44 (0)7549 676279
patrick.willi...@storageos.com
20 Midtown
ure and provision a new instance. Maybe on the order of 10 minutes is
more reasonable.
In any case, it's probably a good idea to have an administrative way to
force deregistration. One option is to extend the DeleteGroups API with a
list of members names.
-Jason
Jason,
Regarding step 4 in your proposal which suggests beginning a long timer (30
minutes) when a static member leaves the group, would there also be the ability
for an admin to force a static membership expiration?
I’m thinking that during particular types of outages or upgrades users would
+1
On 8/3/18, 2:13 PM, "Ted Yu" wrote:
+1
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 10:40 AM Jason Gustafson wrote:
> +1 Thanks Vahid.
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:27 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> vahidhashem...@us.ibm.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I
c member changes are not expected often.
Hence we would not react to those membership-changing events immediately
but wait for longer specified time expecting some other systems like k8s
will resume the group members. WDYT?
Guozhang
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 3:05
Jason,
I really appreciate the broader conversation that you are bringing up here.
I've been working on an application that does streaming joins for a while now,
and we face a similar issue with group membership being dynamic. We are
currently using our own StickyAssignor and take special care
on KIP-315, which is another Sticky Assignor, which
also requires some kind of epoch/generation marker to be protected against
zombies. So, I’d be in favor of a generic solution here that other assignors
can leverage.
Best,
Mike Freyberger
> On Jul 13, 2018, at 6:15 PM, Vahid S Hashem
ot for the KIP. I am wondering, why Streams API cannot be used
for perform the join? Would be good to understand the advantage of
adding a `StickyStreamJoinAssignor` compared to using Streams API? Atm,
it seems to be a redundant feature to me.
-Matthias
On 6/20/18 1:07
Hi everybody,
I’ve created a proposal document for KIP-315 which outlines the motivation of
adding a new partition assignment strategy that can used for streaming join use
cases.
It’d be great to get feedback on the overall idea and the proposed
implementation.
KIP Link:
Can I please have permission to create a KIP?
WikiID: mfreyberger
Email: mfreyber...@appnexus.com
14 matches
Mail list logo
