You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by Vahid S Hashemian <va...@us.ibm.com> on 2016/09/13 19:05:04 UTC
[VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Hi all,
Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't seem
to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
So I would like to initiate the voting process.
The KIP can be found here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
And the full discussion thread is here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
Thanks.
--Vahid
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Vahid S Hashemian <va...@us.ibm.com>.
The voting on this KIP concludes with 3 binding and 3 non-binding +1
votes.
Thanks to everyone who provided feedback / voted and to Jeff Widman for
reviving the voting thread.
Binding votes by:
* Jason Gustafson
* Ewen Cheslack-Postava
* Guozhang Wang
Non-binding votes by:
* Rajini Sivaram
* Bill Bejeck
* Mickael Maison
--Vahid
From: Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
To: "dev@kafka.apache.org" <de...@kafka.apache.org>
Date: 02/02/2017 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
+1 (binding).
Cheers.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <ew...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> +1
>
> I don't think this solves all the stickiness/incremental rebalancing
> problems we'll eventually want to address, but it's a nice improvement,
> would be a benefit for a fair number of applications, and as it's a
clean
> extension to the existing options it doesn't come with any significant
> compatibility concerns.
>
> (Also, this should bump this thread, which Jeff Widman was wondering
about.
> It's lacking at least 1 more binding vote before it could pass.)
>
> -Ewen
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Mickael Maison
<mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
> > > rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 (non-binding)
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson
<jason@confluent.io
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> > >> > vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi all,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> > >> > > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there
> doesn't
> > >> seem
> > >> > > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The KIP can be found here:
> > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > >> > > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> > >> > > And the full discussion thread is here:
> > >> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks.
> > >> > > --Vahid
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> Rajini
> > >>
> >
>
--
-- Guozhang
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>.
+1 (binding).
Cheers.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:35 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <ew...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> +1
>
> I don't think this solves all the stickiness/incremental rebalancing
> problems we'll eventually want to address, but it's a nice improvement,
> would be a benefit for a fair number of applications, and as it's a clean
> extension to the existing options it doesn't come with any significant
> compatibility concerns.
>
> (Also, this should bump this thread, which Jeff Widman was wondering about.
> It's lacking at least 1 more binding vote before it could pass.)
>
> -Ewen
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Mickael Maison <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
> > > rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 (non-binding)
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson <jason@confluent.io
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> > >> > vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi all,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> > >> > > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there
> doesn't
> > >> seem
> > >> > > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The KIP can be found here:
> > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > >> > > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> > >> > > And the full discussion thread is here:
> > >> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks.
> > >> > > --Vahid
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> Rajini
> > >>
> >
>
--
-- Guozhang
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Ewen Cheslack-Postava <ew...@confluent.io>.
+1
I don't think this solves all the stickiness/incremental rebalancing
problems we'll eventually want to address, but it's a nice improvement,
would be a benefit for a fair number of applications, and as it's a clean
extension to the existing options it doesn't come with any significant
compatibility concerns.
(Also, this should bump this thread, which Jeff Widman was wondering about.
It's lacking at least 1 more binding vote before it could pass.)
-Ewen
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Mickael Maison <mi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
> > rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 (non-binding)
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> >> > vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi all,
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> >> > > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't
> >> seem
> >> > > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
> >> > >
> >> > > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
> >> > >
> >> > > The KIP can be found here:
> >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> >> > > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> >> > > And the full discussion thread is here:
> >> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks.
> >> > > --Vahid
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Rajini
> >>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Mickael Maison <mi...@gmail.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
> rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
>> > vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi all,
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
>> > > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't
>> seem
>> > > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
>> > >
>> > > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
>> > >
>> > > The KIP can be found here:
>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
>> > > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
>> > > And the full discussion thread is here:
>> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
>> > >
>> > > Thanks.
>> > > --Vahid
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Rajini
>>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 5:16 AM, Rajini Sivaram <
rajinisivaram@googlemail.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> > vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> > > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't
> seem
> > > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
> > >
> > > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
> > >
> > > The KIP can be found here:
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> > > And the full discussion thread is here:
> > > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > > --Vahid
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Rajini
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Rajini Sivaram <ra...@googlemail.com>.
+1 (non-binding)
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
> vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> > The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't seem
> > to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
> >
> > So I would like to initiate the voting process.
> >
> > The KIP can be found here:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> > And the full discussion thread is here:
> > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
> >
> > Thanks.
> > --Vahid
> >
> >
>
--
Regards,
Rajini
Re: [VOTE] KIP-54: Sticky Partition Assignment Strategy
Posted by Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>.
Thanks for the KIP. +1 from me.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Vahid S Hashemian <
vahidhashemian@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for providing feedback on this KIP so far.
> The KIP was discussed during the KIP meeting today and there doesn't seem
> to be any unaddressed issue at this point.
>
> So I would like to initiate the voting process.
>
> The KIP can be found here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> 54+-+Sticky+Partition+Assignment+Strategy
> And the full discussion thread is here:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@kafka.apache.org/msg47607.html
>
> Thanks.
> --Vahid
>
>