Thanks for bringing this up. I think building a separate HTTP server to serve REST produce/consume requests might be a good idea, like FunctionWorkerService, users can choose to run with broker for simplicity or run as a separate component if user wants isolation and scale independently. I think we just missed this option when building V1, I think it's working considering.
mattison chao <[email protected]> 于2022年6月6日周一 21:33写道： > Hi, Pulsar Community, > > We have the PIP-64 that introduces HTTP Rest API for producing/consuming > messages( > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-64%3A-Introduce-REST-endpoints-for-producing%2C-consuming-and-reading-messages > ). But this proposal does not define the implementation. > > However, we already have producer HTTP API at the broker side. But, there > are some problems, so refactored in this patch: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15876. > > Then we add HTTP consumer in this patch: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15942. > > But, currently have some ideas that do not reach a consensus. Like @Lari > Hotaril mentioned at pull request > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15942. > > It might not be a good idea to add the implementation to the main Pulsar > Admin API at all. > > HTTP consuming would be better to handle in a separate component. PIP-64 > doesn't determine that this should be part of Pulsar Admin API and we > should revisit this decision. I think it's a bad idea to add HTTP consuming > to Pulsar Admin API and brokers. > > I want to discuss whether we should implement the HTTP endpoint in the > broker or separate it at another component(like pulsar-WebSocket). > > Best, > > Mattison >
