Hi Guozhang, Thanks for your comments!
1. We can reduce memory allocation if the key/value types happen to be ByteBuffer or String. 2. I would like to add `default ByteBuffer serializeToByteBuffer(String topic, Headers headers, T data)` in Serializer to reduce memory copy in `KafkaProducer#doSend(ProducerRecord, Callback)`, but this change is a bit big, I prefer to submit another one KIP to do the job. Thanks. ShunKang Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> 于2022年9月20日周二 06:32写道： > 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 >
