Hi All, I added a remark about the repartition of null-key records. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-962%3A+Relax+non-null+key+requirement+in+Kafka+Streams#KIP962:RelaxnonnullkeyrequirementinKafkaStreams-Repartitionofnull-keyrecords
Can we relax this constraint for any kind of repartitioning or should it only be relaxed in the context of left stream-table and left/outer stream-stream joins? Florin On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 13:23, Florin Akermann <florin.akerm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Lucas, > > Thanks. I added the point about the upgrade guide as well. > > Florin > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2023 at 11:06, Lucas Brutschy <lbruts...@confluent.io.invalid> > wrote: > >> Hi Florin, >> >> thanks for the KIP! This looks good to me. I agree that the precise >> Java doc wording doesn't have to be discussed as part of the KIP. >> >> I would also suggest to include an update to >> https://kafka.apache.org/documentation/streams/upgrade-guide >> >> Cheers, >> Lucas >> >> On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 10:51 AM Florin Akermann >> <florin.akerm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Both, >> > >> > Thanks. >> > I added remarks to account for this. >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-962%3A+Relax+non-null+key+requirement+in+Kafka+Streams#KIP962:RelaxnonnullkeyrequirementinKafkaStreams-Remarks >> > >> > In short, let's add a note in the Java docs? The exact wording of the >> note >> > can be scrutinized in the pull request? >> > >> > What do you think? >> > >> > >> > On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 19:41, Guozhang Wang <guozhang.wang...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > I'm just thinking we can try to encourage users to migrate from XX to >> > > XXWithKey in the docs, giving this as one good example that the latter >> > > can help you distinguish different scenarios whereas the former >> > > cannot. >> > > >> > > On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 6:32 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Guozhang, >> > > > >> > > > thanks for pointing out ValueJoinerWithKey. In the end, it's just a >> > > > documentation change, ie, point out that the passed in key could be >> > > > `null` and similar? >> > > > >> > > > -Matthias >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On 8/2/23 3:20 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: >> > > > > Thanks Florin for the writeup, >> > > > > >> > > > > One quick thing I'd like to bring up is that in KIP-149 >> > > > > ( >> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-149%3A+Enabling+key+access+in+ValueTransformer%2C+ValueMapper%2C+and+ValueJoiner >> > > ) >> > > > > we introduced ValueJoinerWithKey which is aimed to enhance >> > > > > ValueJoiner. It would have a benefit for this KIP such that >> > > > > implementers can distinguish "null-key" v.s. "not-null-key but >> > > > > null-value" scenarios. >> > > > > >> > > > > Hence I'd suggest we also include the semantic changes with >> > > > > ValueJoinerWithKey, which can help distinguish these two >> scenarios, >> > > > > and also document that if users apply ValueJoiner only, they may >> not >> > > > > have this benefit, and hence we suggest users to use the former. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Guozhang >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 12:11 PM Florin Akermann >> > > > > <florin.akerm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-962%3A+Relax+non-null+key+requirement+in+Kafka+Streams >> > > >> >
