Re: Correct TopicName#getPartitionIndex implementation

[Jia Zhai]

Thanks Yunze.  We should fix this issue, and add more accurate checks for
partitioned topic names. +1 to go ahead.

On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 4:38 PM Yunze Xu 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Currently the Java implementation to get the partition index of a topic
> name
> is not correct. See
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8341/files#diff-445b0cfa56ca0c784df78e73d9294f2a37f079ca3c15c345b03c09d56f81ebff
> <
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8341/files#diff-445b0cfa56ca0c784df78e73d9294f2a37f079ca3c15c345b03c09d56f81ebff>
>
> for the unit tests I added.
>
> I also noticed the problem in https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10850
> 
> because transaction buffer snapshot topic name may be
> `xxx-partition-0-yyy`,
> which should not be treated as a partitioned topic.
>
> Since Pulsar is 2.9.0-SNAPSHOT now, is it proper to correct the
> implementation?
> What I concerned is the compatibility because we can’t assume users never
> used
> a topic name like `my-topic-partition-000` to reference the partition 0 of
> `my-topic`. If the behavior was corrected, `my-topic-partition-000` would
> be
> treated as a non-partitioned topic.
>
> I'm not sure if this change could have a wide influence, so I want to
> begin a
> discussion about it.
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze

Re: Correct TopicName#getPartitionIndex implementation

[Enrico Olivelli]

Good catch

thanks for reporting this a for contributing a fix
+1 for fixing this in 2.9.0

Enrico

Il giorno ven 11 giu 2021 alle ore 09:22 Jia Zhai 
ha scritto:
>
> Thanks Yunze.  We should fix this issue, and add more accurate checks for
> partitioned topic names. +1 to go ahead.
>
> On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 4:38 PM Yunze Xu 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Currently the Java implementation to get the partition index of a topic
> > name
> > is not correct. See
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8341/files#diff-445b0cfa56ca0c784df78e73d9294f2a37f079ca3c15c345b03c09d56f81ebff
> > <
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/8341/files#diff-445b0cfa56ca0c784df78e73d9294f2a37f079ca3c15c345b03c09d56f81ebff>
> >
> > for the unit tests I added.
> >
> > I also noticed the problem in https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10850
> > 
> > because transaction buffer snapshot topic name may be
> > `xxx-partition-0-yyy`,
> > which should not be treated as a partitioned topic.
> >
> > Since Pulsar is 2.9.0-SNAPSHOT now, is it proper to correct the
> > implementation?
> > What I concerned is the compatibility because we can’t assume users never
> > used
> > a topic name like `my-topic-partition-000` to reference the partition 0 of
> > `my-topic`. If the behavior was corrected, `my-topic-partition-000` would
> > be
> > treated as a non-partitioned topic.
> >
> > I'm not sure if this change could have a wide influence, so I want to
> > begin a
> > discussion about it.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze

Re: Correct TopicName#getPartitionIndex implementation

[Yunze Xu]

Okay, I Just had a offline discussion with @yangl about this problem before.
And he or I will fix the getPartitionIndex implementation later.

Thanks,
Yunze

Re: Correct TopicName#getPartitionIndex implementation

[452718166]

https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10902



 
---Original---
From: "Yunze Xu"

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.8.0 Candidate 2

[Lari Hotari]

There's a severe bug in Jetty 9.4.39 version when using TLS connections
(bug details:
https://github.com/eclipse/jetty.project/issues/6152#issuecomment-817134632
).
This problem shows up sporadically when creating Pulsar Functions where a
jar file is uploaded over TLS.

Issue reported as https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/10906
PR for master branch is https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/10907
(upgrades Jetty to 9.4.42.v20210604).

Pulsar v2.8.0-candidate-2 is impacted.
Please cherry-pick this fix to branch-2.8.

BR, Lari

On Tue, Jun 8, 2021 at 1:37 PM PengHui Li  wrote:

> This is the second release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.8.0.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+milestone%3A2.8.0+-label%3Arelease%2F2.7.1+-label%3Arelease%2F2.7.2+is%3Aclosed
>
> *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> open
> for at least 72 hours ***
>
> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> convenience.
>
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.8.0-candidate-2/
>
> SHA-512 checksums:
>
>
> 9f7304c3d35db97998a16a46362433c43c61d20eb3d2f51eb43175fa79728925175d4646c2cd72ad39fc614e425814af1b9a8a8635545cea291a28e28d57
> apache-pulsar-2.8.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.tar.gz
>
>
> 8fe7e30c3cda0993114996dced0bf49986365a76bcc69b2e68160d6a9e52c9e9a2bc174eba7eb0c7467f6a62e009ee7d8a3457e0e46657ecf8f79f665549a176
> apache-pulsar-2.8.0-SNAPSHOT-src.tar.gz
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1089/
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> v2.8.0-candidate-2 (63126b9d6606863c1b889f75737623e1fa9e1638)
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.8.0-candidate-2
>
> Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
>
> Please download the the source package, and follow the README to build
> and run the Pulsar standalone service.
>