On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 6:01 AM <mattisonc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys. > > This is the refined PIP-242 discussion thread. Because we have discussed > some parts of this in another thread[0][1], we can start the standard PIP > discussion to reach a detailed consensus. > > You can check here[2] to see the PIP. > > > Best, > Mattison > > [0] https://lists.apache.org/thread/5s4kop7qmxgpvsnh65s42r9mv7qc1pxt > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/km7jp26zmnfj6t3hpq0rt77j7wvn45o6 > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/19239 > > ---------- Paste the document to help quotes ---------- > > ### Motivation > > Currently, the Apache Pulsar has no restrictions on the topic name. Even > `system topics`, `partitioned topics` etc. which is confusing for our > developers to identify whether this is a partition of a partitioned topic. > Plus, we need to add more logic to be compatible with this special topic > name. for example: > > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19240 > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19230 > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19171 > - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19086 > - ... > > ### Goal > > This proposal aimed to add more restrictions for a topic name. that > includes three parts as follows: > 1. Using `NamedEntity` to validate the topic name characters. > 2. Make the `-partition-` string the keyword. That allows the user to use > it when it's a partitioned topic. >
You mean that allows the *system* to use it when it's a partitioned topic? 3. Introduce the new system topic structure. `__SYS__<name>__` > > > **Create a topic:** > _no corresponding partitioned topic_ > - persistent://public/default/local-name (passed) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by keyword) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (rejected by keyword) > > _Has corresponding partitioned topic, **partitions=2** and topic partition > name is **persistent://public/default/local-name**_ > > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (passed, Because it > is the partition topic's sub-partition) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by keyword) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-4 (rejected, Because it > exceeds the number of maximum partitions) > > **Create a partitioned topic(topic metadata)** > > - persistent://public/default/local-name (passed) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-z (rejected by keyword) > - persistent://public/default/local-name-partition-0 (rejected by keyword) > > ### Compatibility > > We will introduce the new configuration `enableStrictTopicName` to > support compatibility. Users can easily disable it to get rid of the > restrictions. > > For the system topic names, I would like to keep the original names and > introduce a new topic structure `__SYS__<name>__` > > I think we can spare those extra 3 characters :) Why postfix of `__`? Why uppercase ? Maybe `__system__<name>`? ` > ### API Changes > > Add a new configuration, `enableStrictTopicName=false`. > > ### Implementation > > 1. Add configuration `enableStrictTopicName=false` and make it dynamic. > Can you please elaborate what it means to make it dynamic exactly? > 2. Add topic name validation by `NamedEntity` > 3. Add partitioned topic rejection logic. > 4. Add warning logs to inform users that we do not recommend creating > topics that name with the restrictions name when users disable > `enableStrictTopicName`. > 5. Make `enableStrictTopicName=true` in the next major release. and mark > that this config will be removed in the future. > > General question: In the last thread you said something about configurable rules, etc? You decided not to use this idea?
