Hi Rajan, I think we discuss the newly added field in the PulsarApi.proto at https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19944#discussion_r1153963425 But the proposal doesn't mention it.
Although I know why we need to add that field to the proto file to avoid introducing many changes to the client side since the client had mixed the public API and internal data structure. But, in order to give everyone who wants to know why this field was added in the future. It should be clearly explained. The PIP is not only for Pulsar's experienced veterans. Only when we provide the context more comprehensively and keep it transparent enough, contributors get involved in the PIP review rather than wait until he thinks he is familiar enough with Pulsar to participate. I will cast +0 here. I agree with the motivation and the solution because I have the context from the previous discussion under the pull request. But the proposal could be more friendly to community users and contributors. Thanks, Penghui On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 12:08 AM 徐昀泽 <xyzinfern...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Though I agree with Asaf that this proposal itself is not clear, I think > the design > Is easy to understand from the PR that a new field is added only for > serialization > and deserialization for a MessageId. > > Thanks, > Yunze > > > On Jun 21, 2023, at 03:08, Asaf Mesika <asaf.mes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > -1 (non-binding) > > > > The reason I'm asking all these questions on the DISCUSS is that I still > > haven't managed to understand how you plan to solve the pain described. > > Not to mention the lack of information in the design document I mentioned > > in my replies to the discussion > > > > This DISCUSS thread is not resolved yet from my point of view. > > The design document is not clear to me at all. > > > > Hence I would like to continue to understand it in the discussion thread. > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:00 AM Rajan Dhabalia <rdhaba...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi. > >> > >> Pulsar api provides MessageId interface which is generally used by > producer > >> and consumer applications to manage topic offset. Sometimes, these > >> applications would like to serialize and deserialize messageIds, > >> specifically consumer app which would like to persist messageId and ack > >> with those messageIds by deserializing them. However, right now Pulsar > >> doesn't support correct deserialization of multi-topic or > partitioned-topic > >> because of that 1acknowledge` API call fails for those topics with below > >> error: > >> "Only TopicMessageId is allowed to acknowledge for a multi-topics > consumer" > >> > >> Please visit PIP for any suggestions: > >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/20221 > >> > >> This PIP is created with PR: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19944 > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Rajan > >> > >
