Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Python Client 3.0.0

+1 Haiting On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 3:47 PM Zike Yang wrote: > > +1 > > Thanks > Zike Yang > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:40 PM PengHui Li wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > Penghui > > > > > On Nov 23, 2022, at 21:38, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > > > > > +1 > > > thanks > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > Il

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

+1 binding - Checksum and signatures - Built from sources using `mvn clean install -DskipTests` using JDK 17 and maven 3.6.1 - Run Pulsar standalone and produce/consume case - Validate Pub/Sub and Java Functions - Validate Connectors - Validate Stateful Functions - Run a simple performance check

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Python Client 3.0.0

+1 Thanks Zike Yang On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:40 PM PengHui Li wrote: > > +1 > > Penghui > > > On Nov 23, 2022, at 21:38, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > > > +1 > > thanks > > > > Enrico > > > > Il giorno mer 23 nov 2022 alle ore 13:53 Yunze Xu > > ha scritto: > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> It has be

[DISCUSS] Close the connection quickly after authorization failure

Hi all, I would like to discuss whether to disconnect the broker and the client after authorization failure. Right now the Pulsar doesn't disconnect the client on the broker side after authorization failure, then this client can still do other operations. For an unauthorized user, we should disc

Re: [DISCUSS] Add an option to keep compatibility for HTTP lookup of legacy clients

I pushed a PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18594 Thanks, Yunze On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 12:17 PM Yunze Xu wrote: > > I've investigated more on this issue. The `allowAutoTopicCreationType` > config introduced in https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/4963 also > brings an incompatibility

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

Hi Dave All of the artifacts are signed by me. Regards Tboy On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 11:10 AM Dave Fisher wrote: > I haven’t checked and it’s ok to have more than one release manager for a > release. But are all of the artifacts signed by one individual or both TBoy > and Nicolo? > > The

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.4 Candidate 1

Docker images: https://hub.docker.com/layers/congbobo184/pulsar-all/2.9.4/images/sha256-53ef82d20fa7d9ee4809a3480f98cacea9b608cbb3a428881bcad3b8c77a9a32 https://hub.docker.com/layers/congbobo184/pulsar/2.9.4/images/sha256-cdeaece1241ee3685f62dcf426944dd5fdd04863defad5762bd81aebdc31c251 Please down

[VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.4 Candidate 1

This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.4. It fixes the following issues: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.4+ *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay open for at least 72 hours *** Note t

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

I haven’t checked and it’s ok to have more than one release manager for a release. But are all of the artifacts signed by one individual or both TBoy and Nicolo? The rule is who builds it signs it. Best, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 23, 2022, at 6:41 PM, guo jiwei wrote: > > Hi Nicolo

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

Hi Nicolo Added to the repo. Regards Jiwei Guo (Tboy) On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 1:03 AM Nicolò Boschi wrote: > Hi, thanks for driving the release > > I found out that I forgot to add Pulsar Shell (PIP-181) artifacts to the > staging script, so I created these two pull requests: > - https://

Re: [DISCUSS] The use of consumer redeliverUnacknowledgedMessages method

I am not familiar with all the changes since it's original implementation, nor can I speak to for all the changes that went after The original concept was simple and rigorous. For shared sub, all unacked messages will be redelivered, and for Exclusive subs, the cursor was rewound and everything af

Re: [VOTE] PIP-222: Add CommandPartitionedTopicMetadata metrics

Bump > 2022年11月22日 下午4:03，Ran Gao 写道： > > +1 (unbinding) > > Thanks, > Ran > > On 2022/11/17 09:06:50 Jiuming Tao wrote: >> Dear Pulsar Community, >> >> Please review and vote on this PIP. >> >> PIP link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18319 >>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

Hi, thanks for driving the release I found out that I forgot to add Pulsar Shell (PIP-181) artifacts to the staging script, so I created these two pull requests: - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18583 - https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/302 Since you built all the repo locally, I

[RESULT][Vote] PIP-211: Introduce offload throttling

Thanks for vote this PIP, closing the vote 3 bindings: Enrico Olivelli Haiting Jiang Penghui Li Thanks, Tao Jiuming

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-223: Add metrics for all Rest Endpoints

Hi Haiting, I’m not sure that if observe failed requests latency is meaningful, so that I was added `pulsar_broker_rest_endpoint_failed` to record these requests which is failed. Thanks, Tao Jiuming > 2022年11月23日 下午12:55，Haiting Jiang 写道： > > Hi Jiuming, > > I am not sure why we need a new

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Python Client 3.0.0

+1 Penghui > On Nov 23, 2022, at 21:38, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > +1 > thanks > > Enrico > > Il giorno mer 23 nov 2022 alle ore 13:53 Yunze Xu > ha scritto: >> >> Hi all, >> >> It has been about 2 months since the official Python client was moved >> out of the main repo. I'm going to rele

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Python Client 3.0.0

+1 thanks Enrico Il giorno mer 23 nov 2022 alle ore 13:53 Yunze Xu ha scritto: > > Hi all, > > It has been about 2 months since the official Python client was moved > out of the main repo. I'm going to release the first Python client > release after that. > > There are some efforts for the easy

[DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Python Client 3.0.0

Hi all, It has been about 2 months since the official Python client was moved out of the main repo. I'm going to release the first Python client release after that. There are some efforts for the easy usage of the Python client, the most exciting news is that now it supports Windows after #23 [1]

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate 1

Hi Haiting > Is this expected or a bug? Yes, it's expected. we can ignore this step. I will correct the doc later. > I think you mean RocksDB, it's the default for standalone. Thanks for correcting it. Regards Jiwei Guo (Tboy) On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 3:29 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: