Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-215: Configurable Topic Compaction Strategy

Sharing some more thoughts. We could alternatively use two topics instead of one. In this design, the first topic is the unfiltered write ahead log that represents many writers (brokers) trying to acquire ownership of bundles. The second topic is the distilled log that represents the "winners" or t

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-215: Configurable Topic Compaction Strategy

Thanks for your proposal, Heesung. Fundamentally, we have the problems listed in this PIP because we have multiple writers instead of just one writer. Can we solve this problem by changing our write pattern? What if we use the leader broker as the single writer? That broker would intercept attempt

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Pulsar Helm Chart 3.0.0 based on 3.0.0-candidate-1

+1 (binding) - verified checksums - verified signatures - verified licenses - verified deploying the helm chart to minikube and to EKS version 1.22 - verified upgrade scenario on EKS version 1.22 I ran into some minor issues with persistent volume permissions when upgrading, but it is something t

[GitHub] [pulsar] michaeljmarshall added a comment to the discussion: ProducerBlockedQuotaExceededError: Cannot create producer on topic with backlog quota exceeded

GitHub user michaeljmarshall added a comment to the discussion: ProducerBlockedQuotaExceededError: Cannot create producer on topic with backlog quota exceeded @Icemap - the proper way to change the backlog is by using the admin http endpoints. You can do this with the pulsar admin cli tool. H

[GitHub] [pulsar] michaeljmarshall added a comment to the discussion: why "egatively acknowledged before the acknowledgment timeout"?? after Can't?

GitHub user michaeljmarshall added a comment to the discussion: why "egatively acknowledged before the acknowledgment timeout"?? after Can't? > If you are going to use negative acknowledgment on a message, make sure it is > negatively acknowledged before the acknowledgment timeout. I am prett

[RESULT] [VOTE] Pulsar Client C++ Release 3.0.0 Candidate 3

Thank you for testing this release. Closing the vote 3 binding +1s: * Matteo * PengHui * Hang 3 non binding +1s: * Zike * Kai * Yunze -- Matteo Merli On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 11:16 AM Hang Chen wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > - Verified checksum and signatures > - Build from source (ubuntu

Re: [VOTE] PIP-218: Consumer batchReceive() single partition every receive

+1 (binding) Enrico Il giorno ven 28 ott 2022 alle ore 09:48 PengHui Li ha scritto: > > +1 (binding) > > Thanks, > Penghui > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 1:32 PM Haiting Jiang > wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Thanks, > > Haiting > > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:43 AM Yunze Xu > > wrote: > >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-218: Consumer batchReceive() single partition every receive

+1 (binding) Thanks, Penghui On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 1:32 PM Haiting Jiang wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Thanks, > Haiting > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 10:43 AM Yunze Xu > wrote: > > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > Thanks, > > Yunze > > > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 9:14 PM 丛搏 wrote: > > > > > > Hi, pu