C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1123137976
@guozhangwang to be clear, nobody is advocating that we call `ignore` on
everything. I was proposing that we call `ignore` on everything that's already
defined, which is pretty clear if
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1115515896
Thanks Guozhang. I think the cost of logging warnings in cases like this is
fairly low as users can and should adjust their configurations to not use
nonsensical properties, and the
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1104271387
@guozhangwang thanks, but it seems like the disagreement here is on what
actually constitutes an unnecessary warning message. If someone believes their
consumer is auto-committing when
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1100583118
Also worth noting that if we really do want to disable all unused config
warnings for all (public) configs that Kafka defines, we could probably do this
automatically instead of on a
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1100581835
If Kafka doesn't retrieve a config because it has no effect due to other
configs, isn't it still valid to warn the user?
I agree that if there's special internal logic that causes
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1099784651
@RivenSun2 Isn't this a correct message to log? These properties are unused
if a group ID is supplied, aren't they? That lines up pretty well with the new
log message wording of
C0urante commented on PR #12041:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12041#issuecomment-1099784467
Isn't this a correct message to log? These properties are unused if a group
ID is supplied, aren't they? That lines up pretty well with the new log message
wording of "supplied but are
