Skip to content
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-19026: AlterConfigPolicy incompatibility between ZK mode and KR… #19263

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 3.9
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

edoardocomar
Copy link
Contributor

…aft mode when using AlterConfigOp.OpType.SUBTRACT

Modified ZkAdminManager.scala so that on OpType.SUBTRACT the policy receives the modified configs, as happens in KRaft mode.

This similarly fixes the OpType.APPEND differences.

Note that the policy behavior on OpType.DELETE is different when altering Broker and Topic resources. For topics the policy does not see a map entry, for brokers the config value is null. This was the existing behavior for KRaft and this commit does not change that.

ClusterTest added.

…aft mode when using AlterConfigOp.OpType.SUBTRACT

Modified ZkAdminManager.scala so that on OpType.SUBTRACT the policy
receives the modified configs, as happens in KRaft mode.

This similarly fixes the OpType.APPEND differences.

Note that the policy behavior on OpType.DELETE is different when altering Broker and Topic resources.
For topics the policy does not see a map entry, for brokers the config value is null.
This was the existing behavior for KRaft and this commit does not change that.

ClusterTest added.
@edoardocomar edoardocomar requested a review from ijuma March 21, 2025 15:08
@edoardocomar
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that the inconsistent DELETE behavior between Topic and Broker resources is present in the KRaft mode and described by https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-19028

@ijuma ijuma requested review from cmccabe and jsancio March 21, 2025 18:49
@edoardocomar
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmccabe @jsancio may you please take a look ? thanks

@edoardocomar
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'd love to have this fix in 3.9.1 ...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant