Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
KAFKA-17047: Refactored group coordinator classes to modern package (KIP-932) #16474
KAFKA-17047: Refactored group coordinator classes to modern package (KIP-932) #16474
Changes from 1 commit
01938ea
a82ee40
737bc47
81f73b3
e005d8b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not sure whether this is necessary change. Maybe we should align the term: "next gen", "modern", or "CONSUMER".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for your review @chia7712. I have aligned the changes to have the common functionality as
modern
. As this spec class will be used in target assignment which will be also utilized by upcomingshare groups
. Please let me know if there is correction needed elsewhere as well.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sorry for raising one more question
it seems those share/consumer groups are on top of the new protocol, and the root package of those classes is called "modern". Hence, should we rename the value of
group.coordinator.rebalance.protocols
fromCONSUMER
toMODERN
?https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/trunk/group-coordinator/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/coordinator/group/Group.java#L36
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think that we shall change the
group.coordinator.rebalance.protocols
itself. There shall remain 2 for those asclassic
andconsumer
. Packagemodern
is more to share the common target assignment code betweenconsumer
andshare
groups. Share groups will be be specifically used for a consumption pattern wherepartitions
get shared between clients to facilitate co-operative consumption.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I raise the "naming" issue, because it is hard to distinguish the term of "consumer protocol" and "consumer instance" in introducing the "AsyncConsumer" and "CONSUMER protocol" to users. I normally give up the term used by source code and then using term "next generation" be the replacement :_
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I ll defer this question to @dajac as the naming for new consumer protocol (KIP-848) defined "consumer" as the new rebalance protocol itself. But I don't see much of relation between package names and protocol name, they can be independent.