KAFKA-20096: Add documentation about the incompatibility of RocksDB file format#21397
Open
iit2009060 wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom
Open
KAFKA-20096: Add documentation about the incompatibility of RocksDB file format#21397iit2009060 wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom
iit2009060 wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom
Conversation
mjsax
changed the title
mjsax
reviewed
Feb 4, 2026
|
|
||
| Downgrading from 3.0.x or newer version to 2.8.x or older version needs special attention: Since 3.0.0 release, Kafka Streams uses a newer RocksDB version whose on-disk format changed. This means that old versioned RocksDB would not be able to recognize the bytes written by that newer versioned RocksDB, and hence it is harder to downgrade Kafka Streams with version 3.0.0 or newer to older versions in-flight. Users need to wipe out the local RocksDB state stores written by the new versioned Kafka Streams before swapping in the older versioned Kafka Streams bytecode, which would then restore the state stores with the old on-disk format from the changelogs. | ||
|
|
||
| Downgrading from 4.0.x or newer version to older than 4.0.0 needs special attention: Since 4.0.0 release, Kafka Streams upgraded RocksDB from version 7.9.2 to 9.7.3. This upgrade introduces a RocksDB file format version change from version 5 to version 6 (introduced in RocksDB 8.6). While the newer RocksDB version (9.7.3) can read state stores written in the old format (version 5), the older RocksDB versions cannot read state stores written in the new format (version 6). This means that downgrading from Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer to versions older than 4.0.0 in-flight is not possible without data loss. Users must wipe out the local RocksDB state stores written by Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer before downgrading to versions older than 4.0.0, which will then restore the state stores from the changelogs using the old file format. For more details, see [KAFKA-20096](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-20096). |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| Downgrading from 4.0.x or newer version to older than 4.0.0 needs special attention: Since 4.0.0 release, Kafka Streams upgraded RocksDB from version 7.9.2 to 9.7.3. This upgrade introduces a RocksDB file format version change from version 5 to version 6 (introduced in RocksDB 8.6). While the newer RocksDB version (9.7.3) can read state stores written in the old format (version 5), the older RocksDB versions cannot read state stores written in the new format (version 6). This means that downgrading from Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer to versions older than 4.0.0 in-flight is not possible without data loss. Users must wipe out the local RocksDB state stores written by Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer before downgrading to versions older than 4.0.0, which will then restore the state stores from the changelogs using the old file format. For more details, see [KAFKA-20096](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-20096). | |
| Downgrading from 4.0.x or newer version to older than 4.0.0 needs special attention: Since 4.0.0 release, Kafka Streams upgraded RocksDB from version 7.9.2 to 9.7.3. This upgrade introduces a RocksDB file format version change from version 5 to version 6 (introduced in RocksDB 8.6). While the newer RocksDB version (9.7.3) can read state stores written in the old format (version 5), the older RocksDB versions cannot read state stores written in the new format (version 6). This means that downgrading from Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer to versions older than 4.0.0 in-flight is not possible out-of-the-box. Users must first delete the local RocksDB state stores written by Kafka Streams 4.0.x or newer before downgrading to versions older than 4.0.0, which will then restore the state stores from the changelogs using the old file format. |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"data loss" does not sound accurate. The next sentence explains that data can be recovered from the changelog, so data is not lost.
"wipe out" is too colloquial IMHO.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just see, that we also use "wipe out" in the paragraph above. Might be worth to also change with this PR :)
mjsax
reviewed
Feb 4, 2026
Member
mjsax
left a comment
mjsax
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall LGTM. Some minor suggestions.
Thanks for the PR.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Document the limitation we have in RocksDB upgrade due to file format
version change.
Reviewers: Matthias J. Sax matthias@confluent.io