Thanks, I will send the vote mail
Regards Jiwei Guo (Tboy) On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 11:43 AM Zixuan Liu <node...@gmail.com> wrote: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8157 introduces the > `disableBrokerInterceptors` config and only for the web service, so > causes different behaviors between the broker service and the web > service. > > I prefer to delete the `disableBrokerInterceptors` config. > > If the user uses the broker interceptor on the web service, the > `disableBrokerInterceptors` must be `false`, so this change doesn't > break the user behavior, but I'm worried about the > `disableBrokerInterceptors=true` case, we still call the broker > interceptor on the web service. > > Thanks, > Zixuan > > guo jiwei <techno...@apache.org> 于2023年7月19日周三 11:58写道： > > > > Hi dev, > > There is a config in ServiceConfiguration called > > `disableBrokerInterceptors` introduced by #8157 > > <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8157>, it looks to disable the > > broker interceptor, but commented for using test only. In actual, we > judge > > whether enable the interceptor by judging whether the broker is loaded > into > > the interceptors.Then in #10489 > > <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10489>, it kept the same > > implementation. > > But #20422 <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20422> has changed > the > > behavior, it judges whether enable the interceptor by > > `disableBrokerInterceptors` and then it caused the issue mentioned in > #20710 > > <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20710>. > > This config has a little confusing, so we need to discuss either > > deleting it or using this config to judge the behavior of the > interceptor. > > > > > > Regards > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy) >
