Well, this is a generic partitioner method, so it shouldn't dictate any
particular behavior.
Colin
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019, at 12:04, Justine Olshan wrote:
> I also just noticed that if we want to use this method on the keyed record
> case, I will need to move the method outside of the sticky (no key, no set
> partition) check. Not a big problem, but something to keep in mind.
> Perhaps, we should encapsulate the sticky vs. not behavior inside the
> method? More things to think about.
>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:55 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Justine,
> >
> > The KIP discusses adding a new method to the partitioner interface.
> >
> > > default public Integer onNewBatch(String topic, Cluster cluster) { ... }
> >
> > However, this new method doesn't give the partitioner access to the key
> > and value of the message. While this works for the case described here (no
> > key), in general we might need this information when re-assigning a
> > partitition based on the batch completing. So I think we should add these
> > methods to onNewBatch.
> >
> > Also, it would be nice to call this something like "repartitionOnNewBatch"
> > or something, to make it clearer what is going on.
> >
> > best,
> > Colin
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019, at 18:32, Boyang Chen wrote:
> > > Thank you Justine for the KIP! Do you mind creating a corresponding JIRA
> > > ticket too?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:51 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Justine,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the KIP. This looks great!
> > > >
> > > > In one place in the KIP, you write: "Remove
> > > > testRoundRobinWithUnavailablePartitions() and testRoundRobin() since
> > the
> > > > round robin functionality of the partitioner has been removed." You
> > can
> > > > skip this and similar lines. We don't need to describe changes to
> > internal
> > > > test classes in the KIP since they're not visible to users or external
> > > > developers.
> > > >
> > > > It seems like maybe the performance tests should get their own section.
> > > > Right now, the way the layout is makes it look like they are part of
> > the
> > > > "Compatibility, Deprecation, and Migration Plan"
> > > >
> > > > best,
> > > > Colin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019, at 14:04, Justine Olshan wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > This is the discussion thread for KIP-480: Sticky Partitioner.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-480%3A+Sticky+Partitioner
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > Justine Olshan
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
