Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-267: Support multi-topic messageId deserialization to ack messages

It seems that `TopicMessageIdImpl#toByteArray` now could serialize the optional topic field to the bytes. I didn't test it now but I have a concern about whether it would bring a breaking change. Assuming there are two applications (let's say A and B) based on an older Pulsar client, A writes seri

Re: [VOTE] PIP-255: Make the partition assignment strategy pluggable

+1 (binding) The separated TopicBundleAssignmentStrategy and bundleSplitListener LGTM. Typo: * TopicBunldeAssignmentFactory -> TopicBundleAssignmentFactory * TopicBunldeAssignmentStrategy -> TopicBundleAssignmentStrategy Thanks, Yunze On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 1:17 PM PengHui Li wrote: > > Hi Lin

[DISCUSS] PIP-268: Add support of topic stats/stats-internal using client api

Hi, Right now, Pulsar provides the topic's stats and stats-internal over HTTP admin API, and this stats data is used by user applications and also by Pulsar internal components such as Pulsar-functions to derive the certain states of the applications. for example, there are use cases where the app

[DISCUSS] PIP-267: Support multi-topic messageId deserialization to ack messages

Hi, Pulsar api provides MessageId interface which is generally used by producer and consumer applications to manage topic offset. Sometimes, these applications would like to serialize and deserialize messageIds, specifically consumer app which would like to persist messageId and ack with those mes

Re: [VOTE] PIP-255: Make the partition assignment strategy pluggable

Hi Lin, I noticed the PIP is updated, and thanks for addressing my comments. It looks good to me now. +1 (binding) Regards, Penghui On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 5:16 PM PengHui Li wrote: > I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner. > > From the description of the proposal. You have figured out t

Re: [Discuss] Should current `ServiceConfiguration` file split by category ?

Perhaps another solution is to change the format of the configuration file. The dev experience for configuring pulsar is already confusing and adding more files would make it more confusing, not less, in my opinion. Yunze proposed finding a way to simplify it in December [0]. yaml could give us a

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-265: PR-based system for managing and reviewing PIPs

Thanks for driving this discussion. I agree to change the proposal discussion from issue and dev mail list to PR. It will be easier to review and comment, especially for large proposals. I have two questions about this change. - Some proposals contain images, and putting those images into Pulsar m

Re: [DISCUSS] Add checklist for PMC binding vote of PIP

I agree with the motivation, and we should pay more attention to the quality of the proposals. When I write or review a proposal, I usually assume the readers are engineers with enough Pulsar knowledge background and don't provide enough context. It makes the proposal hard to understand for beginn

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Client C++ Release 3.2.0 Candidate 3

+1(non-binding) Verify: - SHA512 for source code. - Compilation on MacOS M1(13.2.1) - Run SampleProducer and SampleConsumer Thanks, Baodi Shi On May 7, 2023 at 10:53:32, Yunze Xu wrote: > This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar Client C++, version > 3.2.0. > > It fix

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-265: PR-based system for managing and reviewing PIPs

Thanks for driving the improvements in proposal managing and reviewing. The proposal looks good to me. I have only one question about the dir name for the pips. For now, we have https://github.com/apache/pulsar/tree/master/wiki/proposals Is it better to use the existing one? Or change the existing

Re: [VOTE] PIP-261: Restructure Getting Started section

I have one question about the ready-made applications under the Getting Started section. Should we consider putting the application's source code into another repo? So that users can fork the repo to play the application and check how it works. Otherwise, users must follow the steps to build the ap

Re: [VOTE] PIP-255: Make the partition assignment strategy pluggable

I'm sorry for not getting back to you sooner. >From the description of the proposal. You have figured out the problems with the current solution. From my understanding, only the first one is in the scope of this proposal. The other two problems, one is about the issue from ThresholdShedder and ano

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Manager Release 0.4.0 Candidate 2

+1 binding - Verified shasum, and asc of released files. - Build and run from source with JDK 8 - Test basic CRUD Thanks, Lin Lin On 2023/05/05 11:04:19 tison wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the version 0.4.0, > as follows: > > [ ] +1, Approve t

Re: [DISCUSS] Add checklist for PMC binding vote of PIP

> 2. I think the project should pay more attention to Rajan’s concerns about new contributors being either ignored or told they need a PIP for what seems to them a trivial change. We lose contributors. We need to handle that more gently by helping them figure how to better make their PR. Do we hav

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Manager Release 0.4.0 Candidate 2

+1 (binding) * Validate checksums and signatures * Build from source with JDK 8 * Run pulsar-manager with JRE 8 * Test basic CRUD operations for topics and namespace policy Thanks, Yunze On 2023/05/05 14:29:42 Haiting Jiang wrote: > +1 binding > > - Verified shasum, and asc of released files. >