[GitHub] [pulsar-site] urfreespace merged pull request #138: Only replace correctly formed endpoints

[GitBox]

urfreespace merged PR #138:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/138


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] urfreespace commented on pull request #138: Only replace correctly formed endpoints

[GitBox]

urfreespace commented on PR #138:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/138#issuecomment-1175884599

   @michaeljmarshall thanks very much, LGTM


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 2

[mattison chao]

This is the second release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.3.

It fixes the following issues:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
 


*** 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-2.9.3-candidate-2/

SHA-512 checksums:

291eb3f9da234cf38fcd02de781def9a9354025bb4f98c78b160935a6a9c6721cc8280d80b93049656ee5a20e36ddc5d3446b7b034405c07d447833ff65e
  ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-bin.tar.gz

d57fa3c8eae1f3ba60422a56288c99a472a671295e41573c884a9d9a71b5fcf622782732e9cfd5128e1b92304b3812cc877675384ac0dbc78109d7efb23681f4
  ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-src.tar.gz

Maven staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1163/

The tag to be voted upon:
v2.9.3-candidate-2 (dd9a5f1f91651b634600f66c53dcc6ad855fb669)

https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.3-candidate-2

The docker images:

https://hub.docker.com/layers/248117318/mattison/pulsar/2.9.3-rc-2/images/sha256-a7ac6d5ffb2d77102ca6633313c9d0265c1c89c8b0fe859023fbaf3e0d0a7910?context=repo

https://hub.docker.com/layers/247907545/mattison/pulsar-all/2.9.3-rc-2/images/sha256-00e6a886a9285107027afb4c3218c9340efb96627100ff2f1c95d1177bd8dbbe?context=repo

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 source package, and follow the Release Candidate
Validation[1]
to validate the release

[1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation 

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] shuiyunwudi commented on issue #254: Pulsar Manager Username/Password does not work with examples/values-minikube.yaml

[GitBox]

shuiyunwudi commented on issue #254:
URL: 
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/254#issuecomment-1175978743

   Is there any progress? I encountered the same problem.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] Anonymitaet commented on pull request #137: Highlight toc when scrolling

[GitBox]

Anonymitaet commented on PR #137:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/137#issuecomment-1176017422

   Could you please review this PR from a technical perspective?  @urfreespace 


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove Pulsar Broker Javadocs from Website

[Enrico Olivelli]

Micheal,
I fully agree
we need only the javadocs for:
- the client
- pulsar functions and pulsar IO
- shared modules (pulsar-common...)


Enrico

Il giorno mer 6 lug 2022 alle ore 05:36 Michael Marshall
 ha scritto:
>
> Hi Pulsar Community,
>
> We currently host the generated Pulsar Broker Javadocs on our website.
> You can find them here [0].
>
> I cannot find any references to these docs in the actual pulsar
> documentation, which indicates to me that these are not used.
> (Searching for `api/pulsar-broker` returns nothing.)
>
> Additionally, these Javadocs take up a lot of space (about 267 MB
> uncompressed in the apache/pulsar-site repo) and will take up a lot
> more space if we start generating the docs correctly for each patch
> release, as I propose in  PR [1]. Note that the PR currently adds over
> 8 million lines of generated Javadocs where 5,208,309 are from the
> newly created `pulsar-broker` directory, which only contains broker
> Javadocs. That directory is 304 MB uncompressed.
>
> Before I merge [1], I want to confirm whether we should continue
> hosting these Javadocs. In my opinion, we should only generate and
> host Javadocs that are used by the community, and since these are both
> unreferenced and rather large, I think we should remove them.
>
> Does anyone feel strongly about keeping the generated Pulsar Broker
> Javadocs on the website?
>
> If I do not hear any feedback requesting that we keep these docs, I
> will remove them from the website at the end of this week. Note that
> these docs can be generated trivially, so removing them from the
> website is reversible.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> [0] https://pulsar.apache.org/api/pulsar-broker/
> [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/133

Pull requests potentially blocked by the Documentation Bot workflow

[Nicolò Boschi]

Hi all,

There are some pull requests blocked by the Doc bot that never ends.
I left a comment here https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16368 because I
think this pull is the culprit

If we don't find a quick solution, I'll push a revert to unblock the master
branch

Thanks,
Nicolò Boschi

Re: Pull requests potentially blocked by the Documentation Bot workflow

[Xiangying Meng]

You can add a doc-label-missing and then remove it to run the label test.
I have tried this solution several times.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 7:41 PM Nicolò Boschi  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> There are some pull requests blocked by the Doc bot that never ends.
> I left a comment here https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16368 because
> I
> think this pull is the culprit
>
> If we don't find a quick solution, I'll push a revert to unblock the master
> branch
>
> Thanks,
> Nicolò Boschi
>

[DISSCUSS]PIP-181: Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker

[Anon Hxy]

Hi Pulsar community:

I open a pip to discuss "Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker"

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16422

---

## Motivation

The design of admin API now is such that: when handle a partitioned topic
request, the broker will query the topic's partition meta, and then use the
internal admin client to query all the non-partitioned topics (I.e. the
suffix of  the topic name is `-partition-`),
even if the non-partitioned topic is owned by the broker, which will cause
unnecessary  REST call in the broker.

we can call the methods directlly,  who handle the non-partitioned topic,
 to reduce the unnecessary  REST call.

## Goal

* Try to call the methods directlly if the non-partitioned topic is owned
by the broker

## Implementation

* We need to check all the place where
`org.apache.pulsar.broker.PulsarService#getAdminClient` is invoked in
`org.apache.pulsar.broker.admin.impl.PersistentTopicsBase`
* take `internalGetPartitionedStats` for example:

  *  Original:
```
   for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
try {
topicStatsFutureList

.add(pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(
(topicName.getPartition(i).toString()),
getPreciseBacklog, subscriptionBacklogSize,
getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
} catch (PulsarServerException e) {
asyncResponse.resume(new RestException(e));
return;
}
}
  ```

   *  Suggest to do like this:
   ```
 for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
TopicName topicNamePartition = topicName.getPartition(i);
topicStatsFutureList.add(

pulsar().getNamespaceService().isServiceUnitOwnedAsync(topicName)
.thenCompose(owned -> {
if (owned) {
// local call
return
getTopicReferenceAsync(topicNamePartition)
.thenCompose(topic ->

topic.asyncGetStats(getPreciseBacklog, subscriptionBacklogSize,
getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
} else {
// call from admin client
try {

pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(topicNamePartition.toString()),
getPreciseBacklog,
subscriptionBacklogSize, getEarliestTimeInBacklog)
} catch (PulsarServerException e) {
throw new RestException(e);
}
}
})
);
   ```

Thanks,
Xiaoyu Hou

Re: Trademark listing?

[Patrick McFadin]

I thought it was. It is missing from the ASF trademark page is that just an
email to trademark@ or is that something the PMC needs to do? The Pulsar
homepage should be updated as well.

Patrick

On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 4:15 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
> Pulsar is a trademark of the ASF.. It is not registered. Please use the ™
> as appropriate.
>
> All The Best,
> Dave
>
> > On Jul 4, 2022, at 10:24 AM, Patrick McFadin  wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was working with my publisher on an upcoming book project I'm working
> on
> > and found something I couldn't explain.
> >
> > The ASF Trademark page doesn't list Pulsar as either registered or
> > unregistered.
> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list/
> >
> > The Pulsar website doesn't use a ™ or ® on any naming. I thought all
> Apache
> > projects were trademarked but maybe I was wrong?
> >
> > Patrick
>
>

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] dave2wave opened a new pull request, #139: Fix Website Trademark Attribution

[GitBox]

dave2wave opened a new pull request, #139:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/139

   We need to make clear that Pulsar is a trademark of the ASF.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] dave2wave opened a new pull request, #140: Update Tagline

[GitBox]

dave2wave opened a new pull request, #140:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/140

   Apache Pulsar is a distributed, open source pub-sub messaging and streaming 
platform for real-time workloads, managing hundreds of billions of events per 
day.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] dave2wave opened a new pull request, #141: Use ® and ™ on first use of Apache and Pulsar

[GitBox]

dave2wave opened a new pull request, #141:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/141

   We should properly attribute the trademarks for Apache® Pulsar™ on first use


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: Trademark listing?

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Patrick,

See the bold notice on https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list/

The Apache Software Foundation considers the names of all top level projects, 
all downloadable software products, our feather logo, and the logos of our 
projects to be trademarks of the ASF. The ASF owns all Apache trademarks on 
behalf of our volunteer project communities.

This is definitive. I’m on the brand committee. The listing provided on the 
page likely needs a full update it is a complicated generated page. A PR on 
https://GitHub.com/apache/www-site would be welcome.

Regarding the footer on pulsar.apache.org  I’ve 
created PRs - https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/139 
 , 140, and 141

Thanks,
Dave


> On Jul 6, 2022, at 9:49 AM, Patrick McFadin  wrote:
> 
> I thought it was. It is missing from the ASF trademark page is that just an
> email to trademark@ or is that something the PMC needs to do? The Pulsar
> homepage should be updated as well.
> 
> Patrick
> 
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 4:15 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Patrick,
>> 
>> Pulsar is a trademark of the ASF.. It is not registered. Please use the ™
>> as appropriate.
>> 
>> All The Best,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> On Jul 4, 2022, at 10:24 AM, Patrick McFadin  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I was working with my publisher on an upcoming book project I'm working
>> on
>>> and found something I couldn't explain.
>>> 
>>> The ASF Trademark page doesn't list Pulsar as either registered or
>>> unregistered.
>>> https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list/
>>> 
>>> The Pulsar website doesn't use a ™ or ® on any naming. I thought all
>> Apache
>>> projects were trademarked but maybe I was wrong?
>>> 
>>> Patrick
>> 
>> 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-160 Make transactions work more efficiently by aggregation operation for transaction log and pending ack store

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Pulsar-client-go 0.9.0

[Rui Fu]

Thanks for all your votings, I will start working on the release. Please check 
the PRs contain in this release from 
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milestone/10?closed=1.

Best,

Rui Fu
在 2022年7月1日 +0800 18:07，Lan Liang ，写道：
> +1, Thanks for your work.
>
>
> - lan.liang
>  Replied Message 
> | From | ZhangJian He |
> | Date | 6/29/2022 18:05 |
> | To |  |
> | Subject | Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing Pulsar-client-go 0.9.0 |
> +1
>
> Thanks
> ZhangJian He
>
> mattison chao  于2022年6月29日周三 15:57写道：
>
> +1
>
> On Wed, 29 Jun 2022 at 15:44, PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> +1
> On Jun 29, 2022, 14:08 +0800, Zixuan Liu , wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2022/06/29 06:06:01 Rui Fu wrote:
> Hello Everyone:
>
> I hope you’ve all been doing well. In the past couple of months, we
> have fixed many bugs and added some new features for the
> pulsar-client-go.
> For more information, refer to:
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milestone/10?closed=1
>
> For that reason, let us start the release of v0.9.0.
>
> Best,
>
> Rui Fu
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] PIP-160 Make transactions work more efficiently by aggregation operation for transaction log and pending ack store

[Yubiao Feng]

The PIP passes with 3 bindings +1: Hang Chen, Penghui Li, and Jia Zhai. I
will start working, Please help to move to the wiki. Thanks
Yubiao Feng

On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 9:52 AM Hang Chen  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Hang
>

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] urfreespace merged pull request #137: Highlight toc when scrolling

[GitBox]

urfreespace merged PR #137:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/137


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: [DISSCUSS]PIP-181: Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker

[Anon Hxy]

There is a conflict in PIP numbers.   The issue has moved to PIP-183.

Also there is not only one method that should be modified, I will use this
PIP to track all of them.


Thanks,
Xiaoyu Hou

Anon Hxy  于2022年7月6日周三 22:12写道：

> Hi Pulsar community:
>
> I open a pip to discuss "Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker"
>
> Proposal Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16422
>
> ---
>
> ## Motivation
>
> The design of admin API now is such that: when handle a partitioned topic
> request, the broker will query the topic's partition meta, and then use the
> internal admin client to query all the non-partitioned topics (I.e. the
> suffix of  the topic name is `-partition-`),
> even if the non-partitioned topic is owned by the broker, which will cause
> unnecessary  REST call in the broker.
>
> we can call the methods directlly,  who handle the non-partitioned topic,
>  to reduce the unnecessary  REST call.
>
> ## Goal
>
> * Try to call the methods directlly if the non-partitioned topic is owned
> by the broker
>
> ## Implementation
>
> * We need to check all the place where
> `org.apache.pulsar.broker.PulsarService#getAdminClient` is invoked in
> `org.apache.pulsar.broker.admin.impl.PersistentTopicsBase`
> * take `internalGetPartitionedStats` for example:
>
>   *  Original:
> ```
>for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
> try {
> topicStatsFutureList
>
> .add(pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(
>
> (topicName.getPartition(i).toString()), getPreciseBacklog,
> subscriptionBacklogSize,
> getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
> } catch (PulsarServerException e) {
> asyncResponse.resume(new RestException(e));
> return;
> }
> }
>   ```
>
>*  Suggest to do like this:
>```
>  for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
> TopicName topicNamePartition = topicName.getPartition(i);
> topicStatsFutureList.add(
>
> pulsar().getNamespaceService().isServiceUnitOwnedAsync(topicName)
> .thenCompose(owned -> {
> if (owned) {
> // local call
> return
> getTopicReferenceAsync(topicNamePartition)
> .thenCompose(topic ->
>
> topic.asyncGetStats(getPreciseBacklog, subscriptionBacklogSize,
> getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
> } else {
> // call from admin client
> try {
>
> pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(topicNamePartition.toString()),
> getPreciseBacklog,
> subscriptionBacklogSize, getEarliestTimeInBacklog)
> } catch (PulsarServerException e) {
> throw new RestException(e);
> }
> }
> })
> );
>```
>
> Thanks,
> Xiaoyu Hou
>
>
>

[VOTE] Pulsar Client Go Release 0.9.0 Candidate 1

[Rui Fu]

Hi everyone,

Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.9.0, as 
follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)

This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar Go client, version 0.9.0.

It fixes the following issues:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milestone/10?closed=1

Pulsar Client Go's KEYS file contains PGP keys we used to sign this release:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS

Please download these packages and review this release candidate:
- Review release notes https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/pull/804
- Download the source package (verify shasum, and asc) and follow the
README.md to build and run the pulsar-client-go.

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority 
approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.

Source file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.9.0-candidate-1/

The tag to be voted upon:
v0.9.0
https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/releases/tag/v0.9.0-candidate-1

SHA-512 checksums:
79b4b86e35d5aa16c8e8361a9f3f2532075efe93fc79c7f49424b708e31b6716194d3c053af5f8432a52573bb12e5fc1144a2529243066861f692c4c0743a807
 apache-pulsar-client-go-0.9.0-src.tar.gz

Best,

Rui Fu

Re: [DISSCUSS]PIP-181: Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker

[Michael Marshall]

Hi Xiaoyu Hou,

Thank you for your proposal. I agree that this proposal could help
reduce unnecessary overhead by calling the internal broker's methods
directly instead of initiating a new connection, with all that
entails. It might be interesting to hear why it was implemented that
way in the first place.

As you mentioned, there are other internal calls. I see additional
usages of the `pulsar().getAdminClient()` method in the
NamespacesBase, the TenantsBase, the ClustersBase, and the
TransactionsBase.

My one concern with the proposed solution is how it handles back
pressure. While the current solution has its weaknesses, one of its
benefits is that it has back pressure at the request level in the http
server. Do we need to think about adding back pressure to ensure that
a single call does not dispatch too many internal async calls? I am
thinking about calls like `internalDeleteNamespace`, which dispatches
futures to delete every topic in the namespace.

Note: I do not see any security (authentication/authorization)
concerns with this change. The current recursive calls to the same
broker are performed by a pulsar client that needs to be configured
with a super user token in order to work when authentication and
authorization are enabled. Therefore, if the client has sufficient
permission to perform the operation, it is assumed to have permission
for the calls that result from it.

Thanks,
Michael

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 9:42 PM Anon Hxy  wrote:
>
> There is a conflict in PIP numbers.   The issue has moved to PIP-183.
>
> Also there is not only one method that should be modified, I will use this
> PIP to track all of them.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Xiaoyu Hou
>
> Anon Hxy  于2022年7月6日周三 22:12写道：
>
> > Hi Pulsar community:
> >
> > I open a pip to discuss "Reduce unnecessary REST call in broker"
> >
> > Proposal Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16422
> >
> > ---
> >
> > ## Motivation
> >
> > The design of admin API now is such that: when handle a partitioned topic
> > request, the broker will query the topic's partition meta, and then use the
> > internal admin client to query all the non-partitioned topics (I.e. the
> > suffix of  the topic name is `-partition-`),
> > even if the non-partitioned topic is owned by the broker, which will cause
> > unnecessary  REST call in the broker.
> >
> > we can call the methods directlly,  who handle the non-partitioned topic,
> >  to reduce the unnecessary  REST call.
> >
> > ## Goal
> >
> > * Try to call the methods directlly if the non-partitioned topic is owned
> > by the broker
> >
> > ## Implementation
> >
> > * We need to check all the place where
> > `org.apache.pulsar.broker.PulsarService#getAdminClient` is invoked in
> > `org.apache.pulsar.broker.admin.impl.PersistentTopicsBase`
> > * take `internalGetPartitionedStats` for example:
> >
> >   *  Original:
> > ```
> >for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
> > try {
> > topicStatsFutureList
> >
> > .add(pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(
> >
> > (topicName.getPartition(i).toString()), getPreciseBacklog,
> > subscriptionBacklogSize,
> > getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
> > } catch (PulsarServerException e) {
> > asyncResponse.resume(new RestException(e));
> > return;
> > }
> > }
> >   ```
> >
> >*  Suggest to do like this:
> >```
> >  for (int i = 0; i < partitionMetadata.partitions; i++) {
> > TopicName topicNamePartition = topicName.getPartition(i);
> > topicStatsFutureList.add(
> >
> > pulsar().getNamespaceService().isServiceUnitOwnedAsync(topicName)
> > .thenCompose(owned -> {
> > if (owned) {
> > // local call
> > return
> > getTopicReferenceAsync(topicNamePartition)
> > .thenCompose(topic ->
> >
> > topic.asyncGetStats(getPreciseBacklog, subscriptionBacklogSize,
> > getEarliestTimeInBacklog));
> > } else {
> > // call from admin client
> > try {
> >
> > pulsar().getAdminClient().topics().getStatsAsync(topicNamePartition.toString()),
> > getPreciseBacklog,
> > subscriptionBacklogSize, getEarliestTimeInBacklog)
> > } catch (PulsarServerException e) {
> > throw new RestException(e);
> > }
> > }
> > })
> > );
> >```
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Xiaoyu Hou
> >
> >
> >

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] michaeljmarshall merged pull request #139: Fix Website Trademark Attribution

[GitBox]

michaeljmarshall merged PR #139:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/139


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] michaeljmarshall merged pull request #141: Use ® and ™ on first use of Apache and Pulsar

[GitBox]

michaeljmarshall merged PR #141:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/141


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

[GitHub] [pulsar-site] michaeljmarshall merged pull request #140: Update Tagline

[GitBox]

michaeljmarshall merged PR #140:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/140


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Re: Pull requests potentially blocked by the Documentation Bot workflow

[Michael Marshall]

> You can add a doc-label-missing and then remove it to run the label test.

Thank you for this tip. That helped me move [0] forward.

Doc bot failures are more serious now because the doc bot is now a required
status check for a PR to be merged.

Thanks,
Michael

[0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16222


On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 7:03 AM Xiangying Meng  wrote:
>
> You can add a doc-label-missing and then remove it to run the label test.
> I have tried this solution several times.
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 7:41 PM Nicolò Boschi  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > There are some pull requests blocked by the Doc bot that never ends.
> > I left a comment here https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16368 because
> > I
> > think this pull is the culprit
> >
> > If we don't find a quick solution, I'll push a revert to unblock the master
> > branch
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nicolò Boschi
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove Pulsar Broker Javadocs from Website

[Michael Marshall]

> - shared modules (pulsar-common...)

Just to be clear, we do not host javadocs for the pulsar-common
module. We only have them for the Admin API, the Java Client API, the
pulsar-broker (for now) and the Function API.

Thanks,
Michael

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 4:51 AM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
>
> Micheal,
> I fully agree
> we need only the javadocs for:
> - the client
> - pulsar functions and pulsar IO
> - shared modules (pulsar-common...)
>
>
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno mer 6 lug 2022 alle ore 05:36 Michael Marshall
>  ha scritto:
> >
> > Hi Pulsar Community,
> >
> > We currently host the generated Pulsar Broker Javadocs on our website.
> > You can find them here [0].
> >
> > I cannot find any references to these docs in the actual pulsar
> > documentation, which indicates to me that these are not used.
> > (Searching for `api/pulsar-broker` returns nothing.)
> >
> > Additionally, these Javadocs take up a lot of space (about 267 MB
> > uncompressed in the apache/pulsar-site repo) and will take up a lot
> > more space if we start generating the docs correctly for each patch
> > release, as I propose in  PR [1]. Note that the PR currently adds over
> > 8 million lines of generated Javadocs where 5,208,309 are from the
> > newly created `pulsar-broker` directory, which only contains broker
> > Javadocs. That directory is 304 MB uncompressed.
> >
> > Before I merge [1], I want to confirm whether we should continue
> > hosting these Javadocs. In my opinion, we should only generate and
> > host Javadocs that are used by the community, and since these are both
> > unreferenced and rather large, I think we should remove them.
> >
> > Does anyone feel strongly about keeping the generated Pulsar Broker
> > Javadocs on the website?
> >
> > If I do not hear any feedback requesting that we keep these docs, I
> > will remove them from the website at the end of this week. Note that
> > these docs can be generated trivially, so removing them from the
> > website is reversible.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michael
> >
> > [0] https://pulsar.apache.org/api/pulsar-broker/
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/133

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove Pulsar Broker Javadocs from Website

[Zixuan Liu]

+ 1, I agreed with this idea.

Michael Marshall  于2022年7月7日周四 12:09写道：

> > - shared modules (pulsar-common...)
>
> Just to be clear, we do not host javadocs for the pulsar-common
> module. We only have them for the Admin API, the Java Client API, the
> pulsar-broker (for now) and the Function API.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 4:51 AM Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
> >
> > Micheal,
> > I fully agree
> > we need only the javadocs for:
> > - the client
> > - pulsar functions and pulsar IO
> > - shared modules (pulsar-common...)
> >
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il giorno mer 6 lug 2022 alle ore 05:36 Michael Marshall
> >  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > Hi Pulsar Community,
> > >
> > > We currently host the generated Pulsar Broker Javadocs on our website.
> > > You can find them here [0].
> > >
> > > I cannot find any references to these docs in the actual pulsar
> > > documentation, which indicates to me that these are not used.
> > > (Searching for `api/pulsar-broker` returns nothing.)
> > >
> > > Additionally, these Javadocs take up a lot of space (about 267 MB
> > > uncompressed in the apache/pulsar-site repo) and will take up a lot
> > > more space if we start generating the docs correctly for each patch
> > > release, as I propose in  PR [1]. Note that the PR currently adds over
> > > 8 million lines of generated Javadocs where 5,208,309 are from the
> > > newly created `pulsar-broker` directory, which only contains broker
> > > Javadocs. That directory is 304 MB uncompressed.
> > >
> > > Before I merge [1], I want to confirm whether we should continue
> > > hosting these Javadocs. In my opinion, we should only generate and
> > > host Javadocs that are used by the community, and since these are both
> > > unreferenced and rather large, I think we should remove them.
> > >
> > > Does anyone feel strongly about keeping the generated Pulsar Broker
> > > Javadocs on the website?
> > >
> > > If I do not hear any feedback requesting that we keep these docs, I
> > > will remove them from the website at the end of this week. Note that
> > > these docs can be generated trivially, so removing them from the
> > > website is reversible.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > [0] https://pulsar.apache.org/api/pulsar-broker/
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/133
>