Hello ShunKang, Thanks for filing the proposal, and sorry for the late reply!
I looked over your KIP proposal and the PR, in general I think I agree that adding an overloaded function with `ByteBuffer` param is beneficial, but I have a meta question regarding it's impact on Kafka consumer: my understanding from your PR is that, we can only save memory allocations if the key/value types happen to be ByteBuffer as well, otherwise we would still do the `return deserialize(topic, headers, Utils.toArray(data));` from default impls unless the user customized deserializers is augmented to handle ByteBuffer directly, right? Guozhang On Sun, Aug 21, 2022 at 9:56 AM ShunKang Lin <linshunkang....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all， > > I'd like to start a discussion on KIP-863 which is Reduce > Fetcher#parseRecord() memory copy. This KIP can reduce Kafka Consumer > memory allocation by nearly 50% during fetch records. > > Please check > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=225152035 > and https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12545 for more details. > > Any feedbacks and comments are welcomed. > > Thanks. > -- -- Guozhang
