Thanks for the KIP. I'm +1 on the proposal. One minor comment on the wiki:
the `In Windows, we will:` section code snippet is empty.

On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Bill Bejeck <bbej...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for the KIP, and overall it's a +1 for me.
>
> In the JavaDoc for the segmentInterval method, there's no mention of the
> number of segments there can be at any one time.  While it's implied that
> the number of segments is potentially unbounded, would be better to
> explicitly state that the previous limit on the number of segments is going
> to be removed as well?
>
> I have a couple of nit comments.   The method name is still segmentSize in
> the code block vs segmentInterval and the order of the parameters for the
> third persistentWindowStore don't match the order in the JavaDoc.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:32 PM John Roesler <j...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > I've updated the KIP and draft PR accordingly.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 2:03 PM John Roesler <j...@confluent.io> wrote:
> >
> > > Interesting... I did not initially consider it because I didn't want to
> > > have an impact on anyone's Streams apps, but now I see that unless
> > > developers have subclassed `Windows`, the number of segments would
> always
> > > be 3!
> > >
> > > There's one caveat to this, which I think was a mistake. The field
> > > `segments` in Windows is public, which means that anyone can actually
> set
> > > it directly on any Window instance like:
> > >
> > >         TimeWindows tw = TimeWindows.of(100);
> > >         tw.segments = 12345;
> > >
> > > Bypassing the bounds check and contradicting the javadoc in Windows
> that
> > > says users can't directly set it. Sadly there's no way to "deprecate"
> > this
> > > exposure, so I propose just to make it private.
> > >
> > > With this new knowledge, I agree, I think we can switch to
> > > "segmentInterval" throughout the interface.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 5:06 PM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello John,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for the KIP.
> > >>
> > >> Should we consider making the change on `Stores#persistentWindowStore`
> > >> parameters as well?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Guozhang
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Roesler <j...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Ted,
> > >> >
> > >> > Ah, when you made that comment to me before, I thought you meant as
> > >> opposed
> > >> > to "segments". Now it makes sense that you meant as opposed to
> > >> > "segmentSize".
> > >> >
> > >> > I named it that way to match the peer method "windowSize", which is
> > >> also a
> > >> > quantity of milliseconds.
> > >> >
> > >> > I agree that "interval" is more intuitive, but I think I favor
> > >> consistency
> > >> > in this case. Does that seem reasonable?
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > -John
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 1:06 PM Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Normally size is not measured in time unit, such as milliseconds.
> > >> > > How about naming the new method segmentInterval ?
> > >> > > Thanks
> > >> > > -------- Original message --------From: John Roesler <
> > >> j...@confluent.io>
> > >> > > Date: 6/20/18  10:45 AM  (GMT-08:00) To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> > >> Subject:
> > >> > > [DISCUSS] KIP-319: Replace segments with segmentSize in
> > >> > > WindowBytesStoreSupplier
> > >> > > Hello All,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I'd like to propose KIP-319 to fix an issue I identified in
> > >> KAFKA-7080.
> > >> > > Specifically, we're creating CachingWindowStore with the *number
> of
> > >> > > segments* instead of the *segment size*.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here's the jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7080
> > >> > > Here's the KIP: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/mQU0BQ
> > >> > >
> > >> > > additionally, here's a draft PR for clarity:
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5257
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Please let me know what you think!
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thanks,
> > >> > > -John
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> -- Guozhang
> > >>
> > >
> >
>



-- 
-- Guozhang

Reply via email to