Hi, Justine,
Thanks for the updated KIP. The new interface seems cleaner to me. +1
Jun
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 4:14 PM Justine Olshan wrote:
> Hello all,
> I've just added the proposed changes to the KIP page
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-480%3A+Sticky+Partitioner
Hello all,
I've just added the proposed changes to the KIP page
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-480%3A+Sticky+Partitioner
.
The PR has been updated as well. https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6997.
The idea is that there will just be a separate void method to change the
par
Hi Jun,
I agree that it is confusing. I think there might be a way to not deprecate
the partition method after all, and instead create a separate method to
perform the necessary actions on new batches. I will try to update the KIP
with the details as soon as I can.
Thank you,
Justine
On Fri, Jul
Hi, Justine,
Thanks for the KIP. It looks good overall. Just a followup comment.
Should we mark Partitioner.partition() as deprecated? If someone tries to
implement a new Partitioner on the new interface. They will see both
partition() and computePartition(). It's not clear to them which one they
Thanks everyone for reviewing and voting!
I'm marking this KIP as accepted.
There were 4 binding votes from Colin, Gwen, David and Bill, and 3
non-binding votes from Stanislav, M, and Mickael.
There were no +0 or -1 votes.
Thanks again,
Justine
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 9:10 AM Bill Bejeck wrote:
Thanks for the KIP, looks like a great addition.
+1 (binding)
-Bill
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 5:55 AM Mickael Maison
wrote:
> +1 (non binding)
> Thanks for the KIP!
>
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:23 AM David Arthur
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 binding, looks like a nice improvement. Thanks!
> >
> > -Davi
+1 (non binding)
Thanks for the KIP!
On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 2:23 AM David Arthur wrote:
>
> +1 binding, looks like a nice improvement. Thanks!
>
> -David
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:17 PM Justine Olshan wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I wanted to let you all know the KIP has been updated. The
+1 binding, looks like a nice improvement. Thanks!
-David
On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 6:17 PM Justine Olshan wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to let you all know the KIP has been updated. The
> ComputedPartition class has been removed in favor of simply returning an
> integer to represent the recor
Hello all,
I wanted to let you all know the KIP has been updated. The
ComputedPartition class has been removed in favor of simply returning an
integer to represent the record's partition.
In short, the implications of this change mean that keyed records will also
trigger a change in the sticky par
+1(na)
On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 at 22:17, Stanislav Kozlovski
wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 6:02 PM Gwen Shapira wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thank you for the KIP. This was long awaited.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:15 PM Justine Olshan
> > wrote:
> > >
+1 (non-binding)
Thanks!
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 6:02 PM Gwen Shapira wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thank you for the KIP. This was long awaited.
>
> On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:15 PM Justine Olshan
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'd like to start the vote for KIP-480 : Sticky Partitioner.
> >
>
+1 (binding)
Thank you for the KIP. This was long awaited.
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 5:15 PM Justine Olshan wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'd like to start the vote for KIP-480 : Sticky Partitioner.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-480%3A+Sticky+Partitioner
>
> Thank you,
> Justi
+1 (binding). Thanks, Justine!
ComputedPartition#get probably should be ComputedPartition#partition or
something. We typically name accessors the same as the variables that are
being accessed.
As we discussed in the other thread, one minor addition that might make this
KIP even better is a S
Hello all,
I'd like to start the vote for KIP-480 : Sticky Partitioner.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-480%3A+Sticky+Partitioner
Thank you,
Justine Olshan
14 matches
Mail list logo
