Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 3.0.1 Candidate 1

[Zike Yang]

Hi, Yunze,

Thanks for your finding!

> We should not make breaking public API changes by saying they are
 so-called bug fixes. If the bug cannot be fixed without introducing
any new API, just add them instead of modifying existing APIs.

I agree that we shouldn't introduce public API changes to the
maintenance branch.

I'm closing the vote. But feel free to report any other issues that
you have found.

Thanks,
Zike Yang



On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 7:29 PM Yunze Xu  wrote:
>
> -1 (binding)
>
> Sorry I replied in the wrong mailing list. See the reason here:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/6ysc0yys9bkfbp5zky6svj3t2t5f1sy4
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 6:03 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Environment:
> >
> > openjdk version "17.0.7" 2023-04-18 LTS
> > Apache Maven 3.8.8
> >
> > - Checked the signature
> > - Build from source
> > - Start standalone
> > - Publish and Consume
> > - Verified Cassandra connector
> > - Verified stateful function
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 2:45 PM Zike Yang  wrote:
> >
> > > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 3.0.1.
> > >
> > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v3.0.0...v3.0.1-candidate-1
> > >
> > > *** 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-3.0.1-candidate-1/
> > >
> > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > >
> > > 47ac96ece2662163b07a813d60e2143d62b8e8aa9f1baf9023dc818d2aeeb837e8cda208c2d17bed5833e7e1eea8b977f8d2109f2a7f6f8be558747948bd2429
> > > apache-pulsar-3.0.1-bin.tar.gz
> > >
> > >
> > > ef525b4994d9f7d48db923d623dc5a44756bfe3443304f3784a382267a6a52d32f5196996595a58cfc80b2fc54cbc807e0161aaca3fcbff5313fc9378e2dd1e3
> > >  apache-pulsar-3.0.1-src.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Maven staging repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1234/
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > v3.0.1-candidate-1 (d7e863748abbd7d6408aafa924cffb7766f3ab0f)
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/commits/v3.0.1-candidate-1
> > >
> > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > >
> > > Docker images:
> > >
> > >
> > > https://hub.docker.com/layers/snzkyang/pulsar/3.0.1-d7e8637/images/sha256-4221d65596cebdb1a94dece3b0efa2e2312ae65de2babadfd2f319dc4f9afeb8?context=repo
> > >
> > >
> > > https://hub.docker.com/layers/snzkyang/pulsar-all/3.0.1-d7e8637/images/sha256-91ea00abe08bc06833b082766de521f1f929c53f81abbd72f0b9e8a93babaa20?context=repo
> > >
> > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build
> > > and run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-281: Add notifyError method on PushSource

[Zike Yang]

Thanks for the PIP. Looks good to me
+1 (non-binding)

Zike Yang

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 9:05 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> Thanks,
>
> It looks good to me.
>
> Regards,
> Penghui
>
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 8:18 PM Baodi Shi  wrote:
>
> > Hi, Penghui.
> >
> > Could you please help add a section to explain the compatibility guarantee?
> > > Others look good to me.
> >
> >
> > Added it, PTAL.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Baodi Shi
> >
> >
> > On Jul 14, 2023 at 18:27:34, PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > > Could you please help add a section to explain the compatibility
> > guarantee?
> > > Others look good to me.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Penghui
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 6:07 PM Baodi Shi  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, All
> > >
> > >
> > > I opened a new PIP design PR.
> > >
> > > I am looking forward to your feedback.
> > >
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20807
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a very simple change and is forward-compatible. Sorry, I didn't
> > >
> > > notice that this change required PIP before, so the related PRs have been
> > >
> > > merged.
> > >
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20791
> > >
> > >
> > > If this PIP vote does not pass, I revert this PR afterward.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Baodi Shi
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Provide consistent concept around partitioned topic and topic partition/internal topic

[Yufan Sheng]

I just treat the partitioned topic as a set of named non-partitioned
topics. Pulsar doesn't really have any partitioned definition. So the
non-partitioned topics would be the partition of the partitioned
topic.

I think the real confusion is that we can create the non-partitioned
topic independently. While most use won't manage the non-partitioned
topic and use such feature.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 6:30 AM Michael Marshall  wrote:
>
> I agree that the terminology is confusing. On a practical note, that
> confusion likely caused this bug [0].
>
> > I'd like to say "a partitioned topic is a topic that consists of
> > multiple non-partitioned topics". It's better not to use the "internal
> > topic" concept.
>
> +1
>
> In general, I think the equivocation for partitioned topic and
> non-partitioned topic is meant to simplify the abstraction for users.
> Partitioned topics are generally thought of as a single topic.
> However, advanced use cases can leverage the fact that a partitioned
> topic is composed of non-partitioned topics. That being said, when we
> document what a partitioned topic is, we should say that it is made of
> non-partitioned topics.
>
> In looking at your GitHub issue, I agree that the method names are not
> ideal for the TopicName class. We can certainly deprecate methods and
> add new ones.
>
> One additional problem is that we have too many string equality checks
> to determine if one topic is equal to another. There are many method
> parameters in the Pulsar code base that are named "topicName" and are
> of type String. These checks led to this bug [0].
>
> I think it would be better to use the TopicName object more and to
> rely on the TopicName methods to implement equality/comparison checks.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20392
>
> Further, in pulsar, a "topic name" can be either a partitioned or a
> non partitioned topic.
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 8:13 AM Yunze Xu  wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to say "a partitioned topic is a topic that consists of
> > multiple non-partitioned topics". It's better not to use the "internal
> > topic" concept.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 4:31 PM Joo Hyuk Kim  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi community:
> > >
> > > Currently, it seems like there is no good definition of what "partitioned
> > > topic" and "non-partitioned topic" mean and some places topic
> > > partition and internal
> > > topic interchangeably.
> > >
> > > I would like to propose to vote (or discuss) to come up with solid
> > > definition of what composes "partitioned topic", then apply to 
> > > pulsar-site,
> > > javadoc, and TopicName API accordingly.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you think
> > >
> > >
> > > # ISSUE https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/20622  Regards Joo Hyuk,
> > > Kim (Vince)

[DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 3.1.0 release

[guo jiwei]

Hi community,
   It has been more than 2 months since releasing 3.0.x.  We now have more
than 330 commits, including new PIP-255, PIP-275, and PIP-278, and fixing
too many bugs and improvements.
   As mentioned in PIP-175 ,
feature releases every 3 months, we need to prepare for release 3.1.0.
   Please let me know what you think.


Regards
Jiwei Guo (Tboy)

[DISCUSS] Support key filter for Table View

[mattisonchao]

Hi, Folks

I would like to follow the PIP process to start the discussion of PIP-283.

Please don't hesitate to leave your concern and suggestions.

Best,
Mattison

Re: [DISCUSS] Support key filter for Table View

[mattisonchao]

Sorry, I wrote this email through another application. It seems the link does 
not support well in the apache pony mail.

I'll put the link over here.

PIP-283: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20827

Best,
Mattison
On 18 Jul 2023 at 09:50 +0800, mattisonc...@gmail.com, wrote:
>
> Hi, Folks
>
> I would like to follow the PIP process to start the discussion of PIP-283.
>
> Please don't hesitate to leave your concern and suggestions.
>
> Best,
> Mattison

[DISCUSS] PIP-284 Refactor SystemTopicBasedTopicPoliciesService by TableView

[mattisonchao]

Hi, Folks

I would like to follow the PIP process to start the discussion of PIP-284[1].

Please don't hesitate to leave your concern and suggestions.

Best,
Mattison

[1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20828

Re: [DISCUSS] Support key filter for Table View

[mattisonchao]

I've extended the interface to allow filtering by key and value.

Thanks
Mattison
On 18 Jul 2023 at 09:50 +0800, mattisonc...@gmail.com, wrote:
>
> Hi, Folks
>
> I would like to follow the PIP process to start the discussion of PIP-283.
>
> Please don't hesitate to leave your concern and suggestions.
>
> Best,
> Mattison