-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.5k
KAFKA-14690; Add TopicId to OffsetCommit API #19461
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
Changes from all commits
f282791
08e6d6d
564bee1
baa5620
cacdc65
57f9077
3b9cf84
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -36,8 +36,11 @@ | |
// | ||
// Version 9 is the first version that can be used with the new consumer group protocol (KIP-848). The | ||
// request is the same as version 8. | ||
"validVersions": "2-9", | ||
// | ||
// Version 10 adds support for topic ids and removes support for topic names (KIP-848). | ||
"validVersions": "2-10", | ||
"flexibleVersions": "8+", | ||
"latestVersionUnstable": true, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. do we need a Jira to mark this as stable later on? (I guess we'll wait to complete the broker side, and the client side, just in case we decide to adjust something along the way?) There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes. We can mark is as stable once we are confident on the client side. Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-19186. |
||
"fields": [ | ||
{ "name": "GroupId", "type": "string", "versions": "0+", "entityType": "groupId", | ||
"about": "The unique group identifier." }, | ||
|
@@ -52,8 +55,10 @@ | |
"about": "The time period in ms to retain the offset." }, | ||
{ "name": "Topics", "type": "[]OffsetCommitRequestTopic", "versions": "0+", | ||
"about": "The topics to commit offsets for.", "fields": [ | ||
{ "name": "Name", "type": "string", "versions": "0+", "entityType": "topicName", | ||
{ "name": "Name", "type": "string", "versions": "0-9", "entityType": "topicName", "ignorable": true, | ||
"about": "The topic name." }, | ||
{ "name": "TopicId", "type": "uuid", "versions": "10+", "ignorable": true, | ||
"about": "The topic ID." }, | ||
{ "name": "Partitions", "type": "[]OffsetCommitRequestPartition", "versions": "0+", | ||
"about": "Each partition to commit offsets for.", "fields": [ | ||
{ "name": "PartitionIndex", "type": "int32", "versions": "0+", | ||
|
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.
just for the record, this I expect is temporary and will change to forTopicIdsOrNames once we include client support for the new RPC versions
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.
you're absolutely right.