Disable reconsumerLaster method for non shared subscription

As The official doc says "Currently, retry letter topic is enabled in Shared subscription types". But, actually We can use this method when using non shared sub.We should disable using this method for message order considering. Pr: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16745

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

+1(non-binding) Best, Mattison On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 at 13:19, guo jiwei wrote: > > +1 > > Regards > Jiwei Guo (Tboy) > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:54 AM PengHui Li wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Penghui > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:15 AM Zike Yang wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Thanks > > >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-187 Add API to analyze a subscription backlog and provide a accurate value

+1 Best, Mattison On Sun, 24 Jul 2022 at 14:51, Haiting Jiang wrote: > > +1 > > Thanks, > Haiting > > On 2022/07/23 02:00:32 PengHui Li wrote: > > +1 > > > > Penghui > > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 9:41 PM Asaf Mesika wrote: > > > > > Sorry to barge in the vote - I forgot to send my reply on th

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

+1 Regards Jiwei Guo (Tboy) On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:54 AM PengHui Li wrote: > +1 > > Penghui > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:15 AM Zike Yang wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Thanks > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 3:58 PM Dave Maughan > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Pulsar Community > > > > > > I woul

Re: [VOTE]PIP-189: No batching if only one message in batch.

+1(non-binding) Best, Mattison On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 at 10:35, Haiting Jiang wrote: > > +1 > Thanks, > Haiting > > On 2022/07/25 02:23:20 Anon Hxy wrote: > > Dear Community, > > > > I would like to start a VOTE on "PIP-189: No batching if only one message > > in batch." > > > > The proposal can be

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.7.5 Candidate 1

Hi Lari, > The "CI - Integration - Cli / cli" build job passes cleanly for 2.7.4 . This > means that it's very likely that there's a regression in 2.7.5 . I'll > investigate the issue. Any progress on this? Thanks, Haiting On 2022/02/16 10:54:14 Lari Hotari wrote: > I'll vote again with -1. >

Re: [VOTE]PIP-189: No batching if only one message in batch.

+1 Thanks, Haiting On 2022/07/25 02:23:20 Anon Hxy wrote: > Dear Community, > > I would like to start a VOTE on "PIP-189: No batching if only one message > in batch." > > The proposal can be read at [0] and the discussion thread is available at > [1] and the PR link is available at [2] > > Voti

Re: [VOTE] PIP-174: Provide new implementation for broker dispatch cache

Closing this vote with 3 +1s and no -1s: +1s: * Matteo * PengHui * Dave Thanks, Matteo -- Matteo Merli On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 7:58 PM Dave Fisher wrote: > > Sorry I’m late to this discussion. > > I think that the motivation is correct. There is really quite a bit of > activity around thi

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.8.4 release

Hi Enrico, > We should also one last release out of 2.7 branch. > I hope that someone will volunteer I volunteer to be the release manager for 2.7.5. I will start the discuss mail shortly. Thanks, Haiting On 2022/07/21 16:56:50 Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Thank you Yunze > > I agree that it is ti

[VOTE]PIP-189: No batching if only one message in batch.

Dear Community, I would like to start a VOTE on "PIP-189: No batching if only one message in batch." The proposal can be read at [0] and the discussion thread is available at [1] and the PR link is available at [2] Voting will stay open for at least 48h. [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/iss

[DISCUSS] PIP-195: New bucket based delayed message tracker

Hello Pulsar Community, I would like to open a discussion here about PIP-195 : New bucket based delayed message tracker. I look forward to your feedback. PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16763 Thanks, Cong Zhao

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.8.4 release

Thanks for your work! Best, Mattison On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 at 11:34, Yunze Xu wrote: > > Sure, I will take it carefully for those PRs not cherry-picked to branch-2.8 > but labeled > as `release/2.8.4`. > > Thanks, > Yunze > > > > > > 2022年7月22日 00:09，Dave Fisher 写道： > > > > Thank you for volunte

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP 193 : Sink preprocessing Function

Thanks for the feedback Asaf > >- preprocess-function: the preprocess function applied before the > >Sink. Starts by builtin:// for built-in functions, function:// for > >package function, http:// or file:// > > > > 1. While this function is applied only before sink? I thought it repl

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP 193 : Sink preprocessing Function

Thanks for your comments Baodi > This proposal looks good to me. > > > Only Functions returning a Record will be authorized to ensure that the > Function sets the Schema explicitly. > > Does this mean that the function return type is fixed Record? Yes > Can the interface declaration of the fu

[DISCUSS] PIP 194 : Pulsar client: seek command add epoch

Hi Pulsar community: I open a pip to discuss "Pulsar client: seek command add epoch" Proposal Link: - issue link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16757 -- ## Motivation `Reader` belongs to exclusive subscription type, and it uses `nonDurable` cursor. After receiving messages, `Reader`

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-191: Support batched message using entry filter

There is an example maybe helpful to understand the properties extraction: - Let's set `batchedFilterProperties`=`` This means only key named `region` and `version`will be extracted to the batch meta properties - Then we have a producer that sends the messges below in order: - `msg1` with pr

Re: [Discuss] PIP-190: Simplify Pulsar documentation release and maintenance strategy

If I understand correctly, using tags, you can automatically create the docs for the next minor version? So for older minor versions, where those files will be at? using tags from git? On Sat, Jul 23, 2022 at 7:04 AM Ma Jun wrote: > Hi, Pulsar community, > > Happy weekend! > > I'd like to open a

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP 193 : Sink preprocessing Function

Hi, Few questions: >- preprocess-function: the preprocess function applied before the >Sink. Starts by builtin:// for built-in functions, function:// for >package function, http:// or file:// > > 1. While this function is applied only before sink? I thought it replaces the identity f

Re: Pulsar Flaky test report 2022-07-19 for PR builds in CI

Fantastic initiative. On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 10:59 PM Nicolò Boschi wrote: > Dear community, > > Here's a report of the flaky tests in Pulsar CI during the observation > period of 2022-07-12 - 2022-07-19 > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/165FHpHjs5fHccSsmQM4beeg6brn-zfUjcrXf6xAu4yQ/

Re: PIP-187 Add API to analyse a subscription backlog and provide a accurate value

On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 10:36 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Il giorno gio 21 lug 2022 alle ore 06:25 PengHui Li > ha scritto: > > > > > What if the topic owner creates an internal subscription, consumes the > > messages, and updates a count per filter. > > > > I agree with this approach. If we nee

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-180: Shadow Topic, an alternative way to support readonly topic ownership.

Hi Penghui, > One question about the schema. > How can the consumer get the schema from the shadow topic during > consumption? > We should add this part in the proposal. > Thanks for the reminding. >From what I see, Schema is part of a topic's metadata. So shadow topic won't have it's own schem

Re: [DISCUSS] Alternatives to changing public protocol

Hi Asaf, > (the field is not generic, > it's specifically named shadow_message_id). As Penghui suggested, this field name is changed to `message_id` for potential generic usage. :) > The second problem is clients: Every such field will eventually trickle > down to the clients, which will need