Re: [DISCUSS] Protobuf 2.4.1

Protobuf3 support protobuf2 syntax. - Sijie On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 12:27 PM Ming Luo wrote: > Hi Sijie, > > I just want to clarify if it is to upgrade protobuf 2 to 3. Would that lead > to a backward compatibility issue for clients? Proto3 has removed the > custom default, which pulsar api pro

Re: ReadOnly Topic Ownership Support

If you have a topic that has high fanout of subscriptions, the current workaround is to increase the number of partitions. So partitions can be spreading across brokers. So you have more bandwidth to support fanout subscriptions. Bypass brokers to read directly from bookies is also another approac

Re: [DISCUSS] Protobuf 2.4.1

Hi Sijie, I just want to clarify if it is to upgrade protobuf 2 to 3. Would that lead to a backward compatibility issue for clients? Proto3 has removed the custom default, which pulsar api proto uses, and a few others in proto 2. Would that be a concern for clients? Ming On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 1

Re: [DISCUSS] Protobuf 2.4.1

> On May 22, 2020, at 10:52 AM, Sijie Guo wrote: > > Hi all, > > I would like to kick off a discussion about what we should do for protobuf > 2.4.1 and figure out what is the long term plan. > > Currently, Pulsar is using a customized version of protobuf 2.4.1 for wire > protocol. The custom

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-65: Adapting Pulsar IO Sources to support Batch Sources

Hi Devin, The complexity here is orchestrating multiple functions that notionally form the same connector. Thus stopping a batch connector would be equivalent of stopping two functions and the corresponding complexities of dealing with failure in-between the calls. Same goes for other calls. On Th

[DISCUSS] Protobuf 2.4.1

Hi all, I would like to kick off a discussion about what we should do for protobuf 2.4.1 and figure out what is the long term plan. Currently, Pulsar is using a customized version of protobuf 2.4.1 for wire protocol. The customization was made to leverage netty object pooling to reduce object gen

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-65: Adapting Pulsar IO Sources to support Batch Sources

Hi Sijie, As described in the proposal, there will be no change(either in the api or in the runtime) for the existing streaming sources as all. The changes proposed by this PIP are 1. Adding an explicit api for writing batch source. 2. Providing an executor based implementation for the above. In th

Jenkins build is back to normal : pulsar_release_nightly_snapshot #821

See

Jenkins build is back to normal : pulsar-website-build #1003

See

Slack digest for #dev - 2020-05-22

2020-05-21 09:16:46 UTC - Vladimir Shchur: Hi! I'm working on sequenceId support, noticed the following acknowledge response from the server for non-batched messages HighestSequenceId is passed from server as -1 while