[RESULT] [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.3.0 Candidate 1

Closing the vote, with 6 +1 votes. +1s : * Matteo * Ivan * Sijie * Rajan * Jia * Nozomi On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:13 PM Nozomi Kurihara wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > - check signatures/checksums > - compile the source > - standalone/producer/consumer worked > - function/cassandra-connecto

RE: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.3.0 Candidate 1

+1 (binding) - check signatures/checksums - compile the source - standalone/producer/consumer worked - function/cassandra-connector worked - can build go client using rpm/deb packages Nozomi 差出人: Rajan Dhabalia 送信日時: 2019年2月20日 8:18:45 宛先: dev@pulsar.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.3.0 Candidate 1

+1 binding Environment: macOS 10.14.2 - verified packages checksum ( asc and sha all good) - the source package build and test all run successfully. - src/bin, 'bin/pulsar standalone' and client produce/consume runs well. Best Regards. Jia Zhai Beijing, China Mobile: 15810491983 On

Re: Benchmarking Pulsar using OpenMessaging Benchmark

Since I moderated this email onto the list I am cc’ing the OP to assure that any replies are seen. Regards, Dave > On Feb 19, 2019, at 4:34 PM, Tyler Landle wrote: > > Hey Guys, > > I have been trying to benchmark pulsar and get some E2E latency data from > it, and try to stress it in regards

Benchmarking Pulsar using OpenMessaging Benchmark

Hey Guys, I have been trying to benchmark pulsar and get some E2E latency data from it, and try to stress it in regards to End to End Latency. Namely, we have been trying to stress it in a way that we would see End to End Latency increase in some sort of way between say, 5ms and 50ms. We have enc

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

Sorry for hear that DLQ causes GC. Agree with discussed before, Dispatcher is a performance sensitive piece of code. If we make changes on the dispatcher, we must pay attention to memory overhead and blocking. I prefer fixed delayed message solution(aka delayed time level). User can define mult

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.3.0 Candidate 1

+1 binding Checked: - signatures and checksum - start standalone service and client-test for producer/consumer (src/bin distribution) - rat check on src distribution - compile and unit test on src distribution Thanks, Rajan On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:10 AM Matteo Merli wrote: > This is the

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.3.0 Candidate 1

Checked: - signatures and checksum - start standalone service and client-test for producer/consumer (src/bin distribution) - rat check on src distribution - compile and unit test on src distribution Thanks, Rajan On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:10 AM Matteo Merli wrote: > This is the first relea

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

Hi, I am really not into any details of the proposed implementation, but was just wondering, has anyone had a look at how Uber implemented this in Cherami? Cherami seems very similar to Pulsar, its storage system also seems very similar to bookkeeper. They seem to implement delayed queues by storin

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

Hi - Well, it does, but can this be implemented without building a delayQueue? It seems to me that a delayQueue both breaks resiliency if the broker goes down and would certainly add overhead. Perhaps my idea to discard responses that are too new and then retrieve once they are out of the delay

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

Hi Dave! > I wonder if clients can add an optional argument to the broker call when pulling events. The argument would be the amount of delay. Any messages younger than the delay are not returned by the broker. This is exactly what https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/3155 does :). We still need

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

Hi - My thoughts here may be completely useless but I wonder if clients can add an optional argument to the broker call when pulling events. The argument would be the amount of delay. Any messages younger than the delay are not returned by the broker. Regards, Dave > On Feb 19, 2019, at 11:47

Re: [DISCUSSION] Delayed message delivery

> The recent changes made to support DLQ caused major problems with garbage collection If garbage collection is a big concern maybe we could add some config parameter on the broker to disable the usage of this feature and return BrokerMetadataException in this situation, giving the power to the ad

Slack digest for #dev - 2019-02-19

2019-02-18 09:19:22 UTC - Marc Le Labourier: @Marc Le Labourier has joined the channel 2019-02-18 23:28:24 UTC - Rajan Dhabalia: @Matteo Merli @Sijie Guo in some cases, we want to forcefully trigger GC without restarting bookie. so, is there any way to trigger it? 2019-02-19 01:20:42 U