[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall merged pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

michaeljmarshall merged pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mai

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall closed issue #157: Ingresses still use the extensions/v1beta1 versioned resource

michaeljmarshall closed issue #157: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/157 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: de

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-124: Create init subscription before sending message to DLQ

Before we get further into the implementation, I'd like to discuss whether the current behavior is the expected behavior, as this is the key motivation for this feature. I think the DLQ's current behavior is the expected behavior because the DLQ is only a topic and topics lose messages unless they

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on pull request #190: Bump to Pulsar 2.8.2

lhotari commented on pull request #190: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/190#issuecomment-1004554921 > Also, why should we ship 2.8 as default instead of 2.9.1? I guess it could be about doing one step at a time (2.7.x -> 2.8.x, then 2.8.x->2.9.x) and also about

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on a change in pull request #192: [CI] Upgrade k8s to 1.18 and also upgrade helm, kind & chart releaser versions

lhotari commented on a change in pull request #192: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/192#discussion_r777846937 ## File path: .gitignore ## @@ -16,3 +16,6 @@ charts/**/*.lock PRIVATEKEY PUBLICKEY +.vagrant/ +pulsarctl-amd64-linux.tar.gz +pulsarctl-amd64-

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#discussion_r777833010 ## File path: charts/pulsar/templates/dashboard-ingress.yaml ## @@ -19,7 +19,11 @@ {{- if .Values.extra.dashboard }} {{- if .Values.dashbo

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#discussion_r777832255 ## File path: charts/pulsar/templates/dashboard-ingress.yaml ## @@ -19,7 +19,11 @@ {{- if .Values.extra.dashboard }} {{- if .Values.d

Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs it. PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover our current case where we

Re: Warm Geetings on New Year 2022

Thanks, yu Happy new year! Penghui On Jan 4, 2022, 7:48 AM +0800, dev@pulsar.apache.org, wrote: > > t

Re: Voting time period minimum

I agree that 72 hours should be the minimum. For reference, this thread [0] from August 2021 proposed using 48 hours for the PIP voting period, and it explains why the wiki says 48 hours. > (3) to allow time for contributors who are not working full time on the > project. I think this point is

Re: Voting time period minimum

Yes please! I did not notice that. Personally I would be ok with 72 hours lazy consensus, but if we must vote then 72 hours is a minimum. Thanks, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 3, 2022, at 8:10 PM, Haiting Jiang wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > The "48 hours" rule is on [1]. > Maybe we should up

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-131: Include message header size when check maxMessageSize of non-batch message on the client side.

Hi, @Jason918 I think we can deprecate maxMessageSize to maxPayloadSize, and add maxHeaderSize to limit header size. after then, we can use maxPayloadSize + maxHeaderSize to get maxMessageSize at internal. What do you think about it? > On Dec 31, 2021, at 8:05 PM,

Re: Voting time period minimum

Hi Dave, The "48 hours" rule is on [1]. Maybe we should update the wiki and PIP template first? [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Pulsar-Improvement-Proposal-%28PIP%29 On 2022/01/04 03:59:45 Dave Fisher wrote: > The ASF considers that the minimum time for a vote is 72 hours for a few >

Voting time period minimum

The ASF considers that the minimum time for a vote is 72 hours for a few reasons particularly: (1) to allow the world to spin. People are in most time zones. (2) to allow for weekends. (3) to allow time for contributors who are not working full time on the project. Many projects use a 7 day vote

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-132: Include message header size when check maxMessageSize of non-batch message on the client side.

Good point, I think we should shrink chunk size to "ClientCnx.getMaxMessageSize() - chunkMessageHeaderSize", as we have the same header size for each chunk message. Thanks, Haiting Jiang On 2022/01/04 03:27:00 Zike Yang wrote: > But how do we handle chunked messages? The chunked message is sp

Re: [VOTE] PIP-130: Apply redelivery backoff policy for ack timeout

+1 Thanks, Haiting Jiang On 2022/01/04 03:34:33 PengHui Li wrote: > This is the voting thread for PIP-130. It will stay open for at least 48 > hours. > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/13528 > > Pasted below for quoting convenience. > > - > > PIP 130: Apply redelivery backoff pol

[VOTE] PIP-130: Apply redelivery backoff policy for ack timeout

This is the voting thread for PIP-130. It will stay open for at least 48 hours. https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/13528 Pasted below for quoting convenience. - PIP 130: Apply redelivery backoff policy for ack timeout ## Motivation PIP 106 https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-10

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-130: Apply redelivery backoff policy for ack timeout

Looks there is no objection, I will start the official vote for PIP-130 Regards, Penghui On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 8:25 PM Haiting Jiang wrote: > +1 for this PIP. > > Do we have plans for other languages clients? like go? > > Thanks, > Haiting Jiang > > On 2021/12/27 13:24:52 PengHui Li wrote: >

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-132: Include message header size when check maxMessageSize of non-batch message on the client side.

But how do we handle chunked messages? The chunked message is split based on the maxMessageSize(max payload size). This would seem to make `op.getMessageHeaderAndPayloadSize() > ClientCnx.getMaxMessageSize()` always true. Thanks, Zike On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 8:11 PM Haiting Jiang wrote: > > Sorr

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#discussion_r71254 ## File path: charts/pulsar/templates/dashboard-ingress.yaml ## @@ -19,7 +19,11 @@ {{- if .Values.extra.dashboard }} {{- if .Values.dashbo

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

wangshu3000 commented on a change in pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#discussion_r70205 ## File path: charts/pulsar/templates/dashboard-ingress.yaml ## @@ -19,7 +19,11 @@ {{- if .Values.extra.dashboard }} {{- if .Values.dashbo

Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years. For most projects lazy consensus applies: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really advance a conversa

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.10.0 release

+1. All make sense to me! We probably need to move to the feature frozen stage in order to cut a release at the end of January. - Sijie On Sun, Dec 26, 2021 at 8:46 PM PengHui Li wrote: > Hi, everyone > > I hope you’ve all been doing well. I would like to start an email thread to > discuss fe

Re: Docker image docker pull apachepulsar/pulsar:2.8.2 missing from dockerhub

Hi Francisc, The 2.8.2 image is there: https://hub.docker.com/layers/apachepulsar/pulsar/2.8.2/images/sha256-d538416d5afe03360e10d5beb44bdad33d7303d137fc66c264108426875f61c6?context=explore - Sijie On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 8:15 AM Francisc Florian Munteanu < francisc.florian.munte...@infovista.co

Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

Agree to have a vote to keep a record. - Sijie On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 wrote: > I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better > to the community. > > > Dave Fisher 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道： > > > I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENS

Re: Warm Geetings on New Year 2022

Thanks Yu and many contributors for the hard work on documentation! Happy New Year! - Sijie On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 3:07 AM Yu wrote: > Hi Pulsar enthusiasts, > > > With 2022 knocking on our doors, I would like to take this opportunity to > express sincere gratitude to you for making what Puls

Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better to the community. Dave Fisher 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道： > I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS. > > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > We are no more cutti

Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS. > On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > Hello, > We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6 > > We must declare 2.6 EOF. > > IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the Pulsar > proje

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall commented on pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

michaeljmarshall commented on pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#issuecomment-1004388405 @lhotari - do you know why the CI checks wouldn't have run for this PR? I haven't seen that happen before. -- This is an automated message from the Apache G

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #183: Update ingress api version, extension/v1beta1 will not be supported i…

michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #183: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/183#discussion_r25211 ## File path: charts/pulsar/templates/dashboard-ingress.yaml ## @@ -19,7 +19,11 @@ {{- if .Values.extra.dashboard }} {{- if .Values.d

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] eolivelli commented on pull request #190: Bump to Pulsar 2.8.2

eolivelli commented on pull request #190: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/190#issuecomment-1004370311 Also, why should we ship 2.8 as default instead of 2.9.1? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to G

Re: OWASP dependencies check on active branches

+1 - This is a great addition, thanks Nicolò. I updated our Release Process wiki page so that Release Managers will know to add new release branches to this GitHub workflow [0]. - Michael [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-process#1-create-the-release-branch On Wed, Dec 22, 2021

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #192: [CI] Upgrade k8s to 1.18 and also upgrade helm, kind & chart releaser versions

michaeljmarshall commented on a change in pull request #192: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/192#discussion_r777659034 ## File path: .gitignore ## @@ -16,3 +16,6 @@ charts/**/*.lock PRIVATEKEY PUBLICKEY +.vagrant/ +pulsarctl-amd64-linux.tar.gz +pulsarc

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari merged pull request #182: Fixes #177 Fix indentation of component, as it should be under the la…

lhotari merged pull request #182: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/182 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-un

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari closed issue #177: The indentation of dashboard-ingress.yaml is wrong, when deploying shows component not found.

lhotari closed issue #177: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/177 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubsc

Sending 2.6 release line to EOF

Hello, We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6 We must declare 2.6 EOF. IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the Pulsar project. So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut releases for a few important bugs. Thoughts? Enrico

Re: [VOTE] Apache Pulsar 2.8.2 candidate 2

Hi Lin Lin - We really need to complete this release and announce it ASAP. Regards, Dave > On Dec 30, 2021, at 5:58 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > What's the status of this VOTE? > > Enrico > > Il Mer 22 Dic 2021, 10:34 Nicolò Boschi ha scritto: > >> +1 (non binding) >> >> Checks: >> - Ch

upcoming change: Apache Pulsar Helm Chart switching from Pulsar 2.7.4 version to 2.8.2; known issue with ZK when TLS is enabled

Hi all, There's an upcoming change in the Apache Pulsar Helm chart to finally switch to Pulsar 2.8.x, more specifically to Apache Pulsar version 2.8.2 . The latest Apache Pulsar Helm Chart release uses the Apache Pulsar 2.7.4 image. The pull request to switch to Apache Pulsar image version 2.8.2

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on issue #188: Unrecognized VM option 'PrintGCTimeStamps' - Unsupported Java 11 GC Flags causing init container fail

lhotari commented on issue #188: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/188#issuecomment-1004129237 @samuelzimmermanphillips Thanks for reporting. This will be fixed as part of #190. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message,

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on pull request #190: Bump to Pulsar 2.8.2

lhotari commented on pull request #190: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/190#issuecomment-1004101125 Failures in CI which points to #188. I'll push a fix to this PR. ``` Unrecognized VM option 'PrintGCTimeStamps' Error: Could not create the

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on pull request #190: Bump to Pulsar 2.8.2

lhotari commented on pull request #190: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/190#issuecomment-1004035982 It seems that #188 should also be resolved before switching to Pulsar 2.8.x . -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message,

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] eolivelli merged pull request #180: Use NIOServerCnxnFactory for Zookeeper to fix NPE issues with Pulsar 2.8.0+

eolivelli merged pull request #180: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/180 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] eolivelli commented on pull request #180: Use NIOServerCnxnFactory for Zookeeper to fix NPE issues with Pulsar 2.8.0+

eolivelli commented on pull request #180: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/180#issuecomment-1004013791 I am following up with the issue on Zookeeper and I will help in cutting a release as soon as possible. It would be probably 3.7.1 -- This is an automated messa

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] lhotari commented on pull request #192: [CI] Upgrade k8s to 1.18 and also upgrade helm, kind & chart releaser versions

lhotari commented on pull request #192: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/192#issuecomment-1003979521 > Build failed: > > : INSTALLATION FAILED: unable to build kubernetes objects from release manifest: unable to recognize "": no matches for kind "DaemonSet" in v

[GitHub] [pulsar-helm-chart] eolivelli merged pull request #193: [CI] Add job 45min timeout and cancel duplicate jobs

eolivelli merged pull request #193: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/pull/193 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-