You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com.INVALID> on 2019/04/05 16:07:51 UTC
[VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Hi all,
Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start the
vote on KIP-411.
See:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
Thanks to everyone who contributed!
Paul
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
Paul,
Looks like the last note gives the message that this change expects people
to update the quota configurations. Can we make it clear that this change
will not impact quota limits, and that these default client ids are not a
reasonable way to configure quotas before or after this change.
Thanks very much and apologies for the confusion!
Best,
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:33 AM Paul Davidson
<pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> Thanks Arjun. I've updated the KIP using your suggestion - just a few
> slight changes.
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe we can say something like:
> >
> > This change can have an indirect impact on resource usage by a Connector.
> > For example, systems that were enforcing quotas using a "consumer-[id]"
> > client id will now have to update their configs to enforce quota on
> > "connector-consumer-[id]". For systems that were not enforcing any
> > limitations or using default quotas, there should be no change expected.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:38 PM Paul Davidson
> > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Arjun. I updated the KIP to mention the impact on quotas. Please
> > let
> > > me know if you think I need more detail. The paragraph I added was:
> > >
> > > Since the default client.id values are changing, this will also affect
> > any
> > > > user that has quotas defined against the current defaults. The
> current
> > > > default client.id values are of the form: consumer-{count} and
> > > > producer-{count}.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:36 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Paul,
> > > >
> > > > You might want to make a note on the KIP regarding the impact on
> > quotas.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:48 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
> > > > >
> > > > > +3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
> > > > > +3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <
> arjun.satish@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> > > > > > .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for
> > example)
> > > > > were
> > > > > > already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will
> be
> > > > > > "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for
> > > connect
> > > > > > consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the
> default
> > > > quota
> > > > > > limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm
> > > missing
> > > > > > something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward
> > > compatibility?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that
> > quota
> > > > > > limit.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client
> > IDs
> > > > too?
> > > > > > > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > > > > > > So setting the client name will only change something if
> there's
> > > > > already
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > quota for that client?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On the other hand, I fully support switching to
> > "easy-to-wildcard"
> > > > > > template
> > > > > > > for the client id.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <
> > > arjun.satish@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now
> > > trigger
> > > > > any
> > > > > > > > quota restrictions (
> > > > > > > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig)
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > broker.
> > > > > > > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will
> > > either
> > > > > > > require
> > > > > > > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format
> is
> > > > > > > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility
> > > section
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off
> > this
> > > > > > > feature,
> > > > > > > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming
> > v2.3?
> > > > This
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > something the committers can comment better.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <
> gwen@confluent.io
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > hell yeah!
> > > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > > > > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would
> > > like
> > > > to
> > > > > > > start
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > See:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Paul
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> |
> blog
> > > > > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com.INVALID>.
Thanks Arjun. I've updated the KIP using your suggestion - just a few
slight changes.
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 4:48 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe we can say something like:
>
> This change can have an indirect impact on resource usage by a Connector.
> For example, systems that were enforcing quotas using a "consumer-[id]"
> client id will now have to update their configs to enforce quota on
> "connector-consumer-[id]". For systems that were not enforcing any
> limitations or using default quotas, there should be no change expected.
>
> Best,
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:38 PM Paul Davidson
> <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Arjun. I updated the KIP to mention the impact on quotas. Please
> let
> > me know if you think I need more detail. The paragraph I added was:
> >
> > Since the default client.id values are changing, this will also affect
> any
> > > user that has quotas defined against the current defaults. The current
> > > default client.id values are of the form: consumer-{count} and
> > > producer-{count}.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:36 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Paul,
> > >
> > > You might want to make a note on the KIP regarding the impact on
> quotas.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:48 AM Paul Davidson
> > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
> > > >
> > > > +3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
> > > > +3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <arjun.satish@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> > > > > .
> > > > >
> > > > > But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for
> example)
> > > > were
> > > > > already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
> > > > > "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for
> > connect
> > > > > consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default
> > > quota
> > > > > limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm
> > missing
> > > > > something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward
> > compatibility?
> > > > >
> > > > > I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that
> quota
> > > > > limit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client
> IDs
> > > too?
> > > > > > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > > > > > So setting the client name will only change something if there's
> > > > already
> > > > > a
> > > > > > quota for that client?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the other hand, I fully support switching to
> "easy-to-wildcard"
> > > > > template
> > > > > > for the client id.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <
> > arjun.satish@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now
> > trigger
> > > > any
> > > > > > > quota restrictions (
> > > > > > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig)
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > > broker.
> > > > > > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will
> > either
> > > > > > require
> > > > > > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > > > > > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility
> > section
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off
> this
> > > > > > feature,
> > > > > > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming
> v2.3?
> > > This
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > something the committers can comment better.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gwen@confluent.io
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hell yeah!
> > > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > > > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would
> > like
> > > to
> > > > > > start
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > See:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Paul
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
Maybe we can say something like:
This change can have an indirect impact on resource usage by a Connector.
For example, systems that were enforcing quotas using a "consumer-[id]"
client id will now have to update their configs to enforce quota on
"connector-consumer-[id]". For systems that were not enforcing any
limitations or using default quotas, there should be no change expected.
Best,
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 1:38 PM Paul Davidson
<pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> Thanks Arjun. I updated the KIP to mention the impact on quotas. Please let
> me know if you think I need more detail. The paragraph I added was:
>
> Since the default client.id values are changing, this will also affect any
> > user that has quotas defined against the current defaults. The current
> > default client.id values are of the form: consumer-{count} and
> > producer-{count}.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:36 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Paul,
> >
> > You might want to make a note on the KIP regarding the impact on quotas.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:48 AM Paul Davidson
> > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
> > >
> > > +3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
> > > +3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for example)
> > > were
> > > > already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
> > > > "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for
> connect
> > > > consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default
> > quota
> > > > limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm
> missing
> > > > something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward
> compatibility?
> > > >
> > > > I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that quota
> > > > limit.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs
> > too?
> > > > > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > > > > So setting the client name will only change something if there's
> > > already
> > > > a
> > > > > quota for that client?
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard"
> > > > template
> > > > > for the client id.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <
> arjun.satish@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now
> trigger
> > > any
> > > > > > quota restrictions (
> > > > > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on
> > the
> > > > > > broker.
> > > > > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will
> either
> > > > > require
> > > > > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > > > > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility
> section
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this
> > > > > feature,
> > > > > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3?
> > This
> > > > is
> > > > > > something the committers can comment better.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > hell yeah!
> > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would
> like
> > to
> > > > > start
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > See:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Paul
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com.INVALID>.
Thanks Arjun. I updated the KIP to mention the impact on quotas. Please let
me know if you think I need more detail. The paragraph I added was:
Since the default client.id values are changing, this will also affect any
> user that has quotas defined against the current defaults. The current
> default client.id values are of the form: consumer-{count} and
> producer-{count}.
Thanks,
Paul
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 5:36 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> You might want to make a note on the KIP regarding the impact on quotas.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:48 AM Paul Davidson
> <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
> >
> > +3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
> > +3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> > > .
> > >
> > > But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for example)
> > were
> > > already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
> > > "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for connect
> > > consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default
> quota
> > > limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm missing
> > > something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward compatibility?
> > >
> > > I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that quota
> > > limit.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs
> too?
> > > > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > > > So setting the client name will only change something if there's
> > already
> > > a
> > > > quota for that client?
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard"
> > > template
> > > > for the client id.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger
> > any
> > > > > quota restrictions (
> > > > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on
> the
> > > > > broker.
> > > > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either
> > > > require
> > > > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > > > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this
> > > > feature,
> > > > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3?
> This
> > > is
> > > > > something the committers can comment better.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > hell yeah!
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like
> to
> > > > start
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > See:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Paul
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
Paul,
You might want to make a note on the KIP regarding the impact on quotas.
Thanks,
On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 9:48 AM Paul Davidson
<pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
>
> +3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
> +3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul
>
> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> > .
> >
> > But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for example)
> were
> > already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
> > "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for connect
> > consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default quota
> > limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm missing
> > something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward compatibility?
> >
> > I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that quota
> > limit.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs too?
> > > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > > So setting the client name will only change something if there's
> already
> > a
> > > quota for that client?
> > >
> > > On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard"
> > template
> > > for the client id.
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger
> any
> > > > quota restrictions (
> > > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on the
> > > > broker.
> > > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either
> > > require
> > > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section
> for
> > > the
> > > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this
> > > feature,
> > > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3? This
> > is
> > > > something the committers can comment better.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > hell yeah!
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> > > start
> > > > > the
> > > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com.INVALID>.
Thanks for the votes everyone! KIP-411 is now accepted with:
+3 binding votes (Randall, Jason, Gwen) , and
+3 non-binding votes (Ryanne, Arjun, Magesh)
Regards,
Paul
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:07 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
>
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
> .
>
> But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for example) were
> already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
> "connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for connect
> consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default quota
> limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm missing
> something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward compatibility?
>
> I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that quota
> limit.
>
> Best,
>
> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs too?
> > otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> > So setting the client name will only change something if there's already
> a
> > quota for that client?
> >
> > On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard"
> template
> > for the client id.
> >
> > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger any
> > > quota restrictions (
> > > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on the
> > > broker.
> > > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either
> > require
> > > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> > >
> > > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section for
> > the
> > > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this
> > feature,
> > > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3? This
> is
> > > something the committers can comment better.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > hell yeah!
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> > start
> > > > the
> > > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > > >
> > > > > See:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > >
> > > > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Gwen Shapira*
> > Product Manager | Confluent
> > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
Good point, Gwen. We always set a non empty value for client id:
https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/2.2.0/clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/consumer/KafkaConsumer.java#L668
.
But more importantly, connect client ids (for consumers, for example) were
already of the form "consumer-[0-9]+", and from now on they will be
"connector-consumer-[connector_name]-[0-9]+". So, at least for connect
consumers/producers, we would have already been hitting the default quota
limits and nothing changes for them. You can correct me if I'm missing
something, but seems like this doesn't *break* backward compatibility?
I suppose this change only gives us a better way to manage that quota limit.
Best,
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 9:16 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs too?
> otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
> So setting the client name will only change something if there's already a
> quota for that client?
>
> On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard" template
> for the client id.
>
> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger any
> > quota restrictions (
> > https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on the
> > broker.
> > It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either
> require
> > admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> > connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
> >
> > Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section for
> the
> > KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this
> feature,
> > should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3? This is
> > something the committers can comment better.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> >
> > > hell yeah!
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> start
> > > the
> > > > vote on KIP-411.
> > > >
> > > > See:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > >
> > > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Gwen Shapira*
> > > Product Manager | Confluent
> > > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> *Gwen Shapira*
> Product Manager | Confluent
> 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>.
I'm confused. Surely the default quota applies on empty client IDs too?
otherwise it will be very difficult to enforce?
So setting the client name will only change something if there's already a
quota for that client?
On the other hand, I fully support switching to "easy-to-wildcard" template
for the client id.
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 8:50 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger any
> quota restrictions (
> https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on the
> broker.
> It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either require
> admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
> connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
>
> Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section for the
> KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this feature,
> should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3? This is
> something the committers can comment better.
>
> Best,
>
>
> On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > hell yeah!
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start
> > the
> > > vote on KIP-411.
> > >
> > > See:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > >
> > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > >
> > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Gwen Shapira*
> > Product Manager | Confluent
> > 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> > Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> > <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
> >
>
--
*Gwen Shapira*
Product Manager | Confluent
650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
<http://www.confluent.io/blog>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
I just realized that setting the client.id on the will now trigger any
quota restrictions (
https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/#design_quotasconfig) on the broker.
It seems like this PR will enforce quota policies that will either require
admins to set limits for each task (since the chosen format is
connector-*-id), or fallback to some default value.
Maybe we should mention this in the backward compatibility section for the
KIP. At the same time, since there is no way atm to turn off this feature,
should this feature be merged and released in the upcoming v2.3? This is
something the committers can comment better.
Best,
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 5:13 PM Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io> wrote:
> hell yeah!
> +1
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
> <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start
> the
> > vote on KIP-411.
> >
> > See:
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> >
> > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
>
> --
> *Gwen Shapira*
> Product Manager | Confluent
> 650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
> Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
> <http://www.confluent.io/blog>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Gwen Shapira <gw...@confluent.io>.
hell yeah!
+1
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:08 AM Paul Davidson
<pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start the
> vote on KIP-411.
>
> See:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
>
> Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
>
> Thanks to everyone who contributed!
>
> Paul
>
--
*Gwen Shapira*
Product Manager | Confluent
650.450.2760 | @gwenshap
Follow us: Twitter <https://twitter.com/ConfluentInc> | blog
<http://www.confluent.io/blog>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>.
Looks helpful. +1
-Jason
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:54 PM Randall Hauch <rh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice simple improvement. Thanks, Paul!
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Randall
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 5:06 PM Magesh Nandakumar <ma...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Looks good to me and a very useful feature.
> >
> > +1 ( non-binding)
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 4:05 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, Paul! This is very useful.
> > >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Arjun
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 4:13 PM Ryanne Dolan <ry...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Ryanne
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:11 AM Paul Davidson
> > > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received
> > yet!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <
> > pdavidson@salesforce.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> > > start
> > > > > > the vote on KIP-411.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Also see the related PR:
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Randall Hauch <rh...@gmail.com>.
Nice simple improvement. Thanks, Paul!
+1 (binding)
Randall
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 5:06 PM Magesh Nandakumar <ma...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> Looks good to me and a very useful feature.
>
> +1 ( non-binding)
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 4:05 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, Paul! This is very useful.
> >
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Arjun
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 4:13 PM Ryanne Dolan <ry...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Ryanne
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:11 AM Paul Davidson
> > > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received
> yet!
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <
> pdavidson@salesforce.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> > start
> > > > > the vote on KIP-411.
> > > > >
> > > > > See:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > > >
> > > > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Magesh Nandakumar <ma...@confluent.io>.
Looks good to me and a very useful feature.
+1 ( non-binding)
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019, 4:05 PM Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Paul! This is very useful.
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Arjun
>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 4:13 PM Ryanne Dolan <ry...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Thanks
> > Ryanne
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:11 AM Paul Davidson
> > <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > > Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received yet!
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <pdavidson@salesforce.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to
> start
> > > > the vote on KIP-411.
> > > >
> > > > See:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > > >
> > > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Arjun Satish <ar...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, Paul! This is very useful.
+1 (non-binding)
Best,
Arjun
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 4:13 PM Ryanne Dolan <ry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (non binding)
>
> Thanks
> Ryanne
>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:11 AM Paul Davidson
> <pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received yet!
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start
> > > the vote on KIP-411.
> > >
> > > See:
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> > >
> > > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> > >
> > > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Ryanne Dolan <ry...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non binding)
Thanks
Ryanne
On Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:11 AM Paul Davidson
<pd...@salesforce.com.invalid> wrote:
> Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received yet!
>
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start
> > the vote on KIP-411.
> >
> > See:
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
> >
> > Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who contributed!
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-411: Make default Kafka Connect worker task client IDs distinct
Posted by Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com.INVALID>.
Just a reminder that KIP-411 is open for voting. No votes received yet!
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 9:07 AM Paul Davidson <pd...@salesforce.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Since we seem to have agreement in the discussion I would like to start
> the vote on KIP-411.
>
> See:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-411%3A+Make+default+Kafka+Connect+worker+task+client+IDs+distinct
>
> Also see the related PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6097
>
> Thanks to everyone who contributed!
>
> Paul
>