Re: First Pulsar Community Meeting - 2/2 & 2/4

The following items are not discussed in this meeting due to time limits. If you have any idea on those items, feel free to discuss in the mailing list. Thank you. - *Moving Pulsar 2.8 to JDK11* - *EOS version*: since we introduce time-based release plan

Re: First Pulsar Community Meeting - 2/2 & 2/4

It's great to start the Pulsar community meeting. Thank you everybody for taking your time in this meeting, and thank Sijie or coordinating. Best Regards, Jennifer On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 1:52 PM Jonathan Ellis wrote: > Great first meeting. Thanks for coordinating, Sijie! > > On Tue, Feb 2, 20

TGI-Pulsar is back!

Hi all, TGI-Pulsar is back! In the past 2020, we have successfully run 18 episodes and received a lot of useful feedback. Thanks to everyone who has participated there! We are returning this year with a new format to make

Re: First Pulsar Community Meeting - 2/2 & 2/4

Great first meeting. Thanks for coordinating, Sijie! On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 11:04 PM Sijie Guo wrote: > Thanks to everyone for participating in the meeting! > > The meeting notes are in > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/19dXkVXeU2q_nHmkG8zURjKnYlvD96TbKf5KjYyASsOE/edit# > . > The recording

Re: [E] Re: [PIP-78] Split the individual acknowledgments into multiple entries

@Rajan Dhabalia We discussed this PIP in the community meeting and agreed that we need to evaluate this PIP one more time to see if we can combine this PIP together with the bitmap proposal together as the final solution. We should think about more use cases before pushing the bitmap approach. H

Re: why not process bk error code LedgerFencedException

I see. You are right. In this case, if the exception is LedgerFencedException, that means that the current writer already lost the ownership. We can propagate the exception to the broker to give up the ownership. Thanks, Sijie On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 7:15 PM yang chen wrote: > > https://github.c

Re: [PIP-78] Reduce redundant producers from partitioned producer

Hi Yuri, In today's community meeting, Matteo shared some of his thoughts about this PIP. You can find some meeting notes here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19dXkVXeU2q_nHmkG8zURjKnYlvD96TbKf5KjYyASsOE/edit#bookmark=id.rezbt4xmjxpz Matteo can also chime in as well. - Sijie On Sun, Jan 31

Re: First Pulsar Community Meeting - 2/2 & 2/4

Thanks to everyone for participating in the meeting! The meeting notes are in https://docs.google.com/document/d/19dXkVXeU2q_nHmkG8zURjKnYlvD96TbKf5KjYyASsOE/edit# . The recording is also available at https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Community-Meetings#recordings In case you didn't get a chan

Re: PIP 80 Unified namespace-level admin API

@PengHui Li Looks good to me! Thank you for taking of this! This will address a lot of confusion in the documentation. Can you add the PIP to the wiki page? Thanks, Sijie On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 6:56 AM PengHui Li wrote: > Hi all, we have drafted a PIP to discuss unify the namespace-level admi

Re: Fixing flaky tests: help needed

Hi all, There are links to recent failures of a particular flaky test in the recently reported flaky test GitHub issues ( https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?q=flaky+sort%3Aupdated-desc+is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen ). Example from https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/9437 : example failure 2021-02

Re: PIP 80 Unified namespace-level admin API

Penghui, thanks for the initiative, awesome work +1 I left just one comment in the GDoc Enrico Il giorno mar 2 feb 2021 alle ore 15:57 PengHui Li ha scritto: > Hi all, we have drafted a PIP to discuss unify the namespace-level admin > API. The details of the proposal you can see > > https://d

Re: Fixing flaky tests: help needed

The good progress continues! One way to see the issue & PR activity where "flaky" is mentioned: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?q=flaky+sort%3Aupdated-desc Thank you to the contributors and PR reviewers! Here's the next flaky test for someone to fix: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues

Re: Virtual Pulsar Community Meetings

Since it got a little buried in the thread, here's a reminder that the first meeting is today at 4 Pacific. Agenda and call info are here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19dXkVXeU2q_nHmkG8zURjKnYlvD96TbKf5KjYyASsOE/edit On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 12:53 PM Sijie Guo wrote: > FYI - I created a w

PIP 80 Unified namespace-level admin API

Hi all, we have drafted a PIP to discuss unify the namespace-level admin API. The details of the proposal you can see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bEtfrYebwCfTuAkFFPOhDk1F1NtaCJJZMK428e_rykE/edit?usp=sharing Looking forward to your feedback. Thanks Penghui

Re: [Discuss] draft PIP for "Changes to GitHub Actions based Pulsar CI"

Thank you, Ali. This sounds good! BR, Lari On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 11:47 PM Ali Ahmed wrote: > We will need some simple connectors without dependencies, to replace the > existing ones for basic integration testing. I can write those. > > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 1:17 PM Sijie Guo wrote: > > >

Re: [Discuss] draft PIP for "Changes to GitHub Actions based Pulsar CI"

Hi Sijie, > Yes. I was doing the work there and hopefully will get there soon. Is the plan to do the 2.8.0 release with the new repositories and repository structure in place? I'd be interested in understanding how releasing is intended to be carried out with multiple repositories without runnin