-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
docs(diagrams): updates digrams to be more kraft friendly #9962
docs(diagrams): updates digrams to be more kraft friendly #9962
Conversation
Signed-off-by: prmellor <[email protected]>
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.
Some nits, but looks nice otherwise.
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.
It is a nit and I'm not sure it is worth changing the image. But all the other OAuth images seem to use Kafka broker
. Only this one seems to use Kafka node
. Might make sense to use Kafka broker
here 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.
I didn't spot that. We'll change that back.
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.
The pod numbers here are confusing. Maybe we can remove them for both brokers and controllers and just have multiple squares with Kafka broker pod
and Kafka controller pod
without the numbers?
(The source of confusion is that you cannot have broker 1
and controller 1
at the same time => so the numbers do not correspond to the actual node IDs. I don't think this is wrong as the number indicates the count, but it might confuse someone. The ZooKeeper based image is fine as the ZooKeeper nodes have their own IDs independent on Kafka. So no need to fix that.)
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 it's confusing. I wouldn't assume to think we're talking IDs here. I could make this obvious in the surrounding text if we really need to. If we change it, we lose consistency with the zookeeper diagram. What are your thoughts @scholzj?
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.
Well, as I said, I would remove the numbers from the picture. I think it can be confusing because the IDs play a key part and the way they work in KRaft with the same series used for everything is already confusing enough with KRaft based on some Slack questions.
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.
Okay. We don't want to cause any confusion. I'll get that updated. Any objections to removing the numbers from the zookeeper diagram for consistency sake?
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 would agree with Jakub and I am fine removing the numbers from ZooKeeper diagram as well.
Signed-off-by: prmellor <[email protected]>
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.
LGTM.
Documentation
Updates documentation diagrams to be more KRaft friendly, including changing references from broker to nodes and a diagram showing secure communication in KRaft-based cluster
OAuth diagrams updated for consistency
Checklist
Please go through this checklist and make sure all applicable tasks have been done