I intend to suggest we piggyback this change, just for connivence.
Guozhang
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> I am open to remove the index API and also open to piggyback this change
> on this KIP... Not sure if this was the intention of your comment? Or
> should be have a separate KIP for this?
>
> Not sure, what other think about removing the index API?
>
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 2/5/18 4:13 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> > This is not included in this KIP, but I'm wondering if we should still
> > support forwarding to a child with index.
> >
> > Because 1) if users are using DSL, they would probably never use this API
> > since the ordering of the child is hard to reason from a DSL anyways.
> > 2) if users are using PAPI, they would just use the other
> > overload with child name.
> >
> > In fact the index currently is only used at KStream.branch internally,
> and
> > maybe we can just keep a map from predicate to child name inside Filter
> > operator, so that we do not use it at all. Just as a hindsight, I feel
> this
> > overloading API is not useful to users at all.
> >
> >
> > Guozhang
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> I updated the KIP accordingly and started work on the PR to see if this
> >> `To` interface work nicely.
> >>
> >> -Matthias
> >>
> >> On 2/1/18 4:00 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> >>> Yeah.
> >>> Cleaner in this formation.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:59 PM, Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> `To` works for me.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Bill
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Matthias J. Sax <
> matth...@confluent.io>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> @Paolo:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The timestamp will be used to set the message/record metadata
> timestamp
> >>>>> on `Producer.send(new ProducerRecord(...,timestamp,...))`.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> @Bill,Ted:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Might be a good idea. I was thinking about the name, and came up with
> >>>> `To`:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> context.forward(key, value, To.child("processorX").
> withTimestamp(5));
> >>>>>> context.forward(key, value, To.child(1).withTimestamp(10));
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Without specifying the downstream child processor:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> context.forward(key, value, To.all().withTimestamp(5));
> >>>>>
> >>>>> WDYT?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2/1/18 8:45 AM, Ted Yu wrote:
> >>>>>> I like Bill's idea (pending a better name for the Forwarded).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:47 AM, Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Matthias,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for the KIP!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Could we consider taking an approach similar to what was done in
> >>>> KIP-182
> >>>>>>> with regards to overloading?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Meaning we could add a "Forwarded" object (horrible name I know)
> with
> >>>>>>> methods withTimestamp, withChildName, and withChildIndex. To handle
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>> case when both a child-name and child-index is provided we could
> >> throw
> >>>>> an
> >>>>>>> exception.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Then we could reduce the overloaded {{forward}} methods from 6 to
> 2.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Bill
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:49 AM, Paolo Patierno <ppatie...@live.com
> >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Matthias,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> just a question : what will be the timestamp "type" in the new
> >>>> message
> >>>>> on
> >>>>>>>> the wire ?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Paolo.
> >>>>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>>>> From: Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>
> >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 2:06 AM
> >>>>>>>> To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> >>>>>>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] KIP-251: Allow timestamp manipulation in
> >> Processor
> >>>>> API
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I want to propose a new KIP for Kafka Streams that allows
> timestamp
> >>>>>>>> manipulation at Processor API level.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> >>>>>>>> 251%3A+Allow+timestamp+manipulation+in+Processor+API
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Looking forward to your feedback.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Matthias
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
--
-- Guozhang
