Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

We've had several bugs related to this topic of auto created partitioned topics recently. These three PRs come to mind: * https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20370 * https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20392 * https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20397 Those PRs rely on server side inference

[DISCUSS] PIP-273: Enable hostname verification by default

Hi Pulsar Community, I am writing to start the discussion on PIP 273 to enable hostname verification by default. PR with PIP contents: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20453 I copy the content below (except for the associated svg of the pulsar network diagram). I look forward to your feedb

Re: [DISCUSS] forbid user to upload `BYTES` schema

Treating the BYTES schema differently (i.e. forbid uploading it) than other schemas will be confusing to users. If the BYTES schema is the default schema for a new topic, then how about saving a BYTES schema in the registry instead of saving nothing? On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 8:42 PM PengHui Li

Re: [DISUCSS] Fix and republish the pulsar-all image for Pulsar 3.0.0

Il giorno mer 31 mag 2023 alle ore 16:50 Michael Marshall ha scritto: > > The best solution is to make the build repeatable. IIUC, that will let > us build all of the artifacts using CI instead of personal machines, > which removes this class of errors. > > That being said, I don't know how much e

Re: [DISUCSS] Fix and republish the pulsar-all image for Pulsar 3.0.0

The best solution is to make the build repeatable. IIUC, that will let us build all of the artifacts using CI instead of personal machines, which removes this class of errors. That being said, I don't know how much effort it would be to achieve. Thanks, Michael On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 2:24 AM Zi

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

Hi @Enrico > I think that it is better to add flags like: > - allowAutoTopiCreation: default "true", if "false" the broker > won't create the topic in any case > autoTopicCreationMode: undefined/partitioned/non-partitioned I agree with you, but now the problem is that we still need an identifier

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

Hi Enrico > One problem with partitioned topic and DLQ is that you > probably want the same number of partitions on the > side topic as the original topic, so probably you have > to carry that parameter (number of partitions). I understand your concern, but this problem does not exist. If the m

Re: [VOTE] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

-1 I had missed the discussion thread. Please follow up there Enrico Il giorno ven 5 mag 2023 alle ore 17:04 Yubiao Feng ha scritto: > > Hi Pulsar Community > > This thread is to start the vote for PIP 259. > > Discussion: *https://lists.apache.org/thread/tp25lom2ggztljlo76krsldo270f293j >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

-1 I had missed the discussion thread. Please follow up there Enrico Il giorno mer 31 mag 2023 alle ore 09:07 Yubiao Feng ha scritto: > > Hi Pulsar Community > > This thread is to start the vote for PIP 263. > I'm starting the voting process for PIP-263. > > DISCUSS: https://lists.apache.org/thr

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

Yubiao, I understand your problem: DLQ and retry topic don't play well with automatic topic creation. We are introducing wire protocol changes and also starting to add topic properties for every new topic (they come with a cost on metadata). I am not sure that adding the purposeOfAutoCreatedTopi

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-272 Add a `StateStoreConfig` to the `WorkerConfig`

Pengcheng, would you be willing to be the inaugural PIP in our PIP submission process? Yesterday, we officially moved from the GitHub issue to a markdown file for PIP submissions. For you, it basically means moving your proposal to a markdown file and submitting a PR (and deleting the content in t

Re: PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

I forgot to add [vote] in the title of this email and sent another one On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 3:05 PM Yubiao Feng wrote: > Hi Pulsar Community > > This thread is to start the vote for PIP 263. > I'm starting the voting process for PIP-263. > > DISCUSS: https://lists.apache.org/thread/tp25lom2gg

[VOTE] PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

Hi Pulsar Community This thread is to start the vote for PIP 263. I'm starting the voting process for PIP-263. DISCUSS: https://lists.apache.org/thread/tp25lom2ggztljlo76krsldo270f293j PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20445 Thanks Yubiao Feng

PIP-263: Just auto-create no-partitioned DLQ And Prevent auto-create a DLQ for a DLQ

Hi Pulsar Community This thread is to start the vote for PIP 263. I'm starting the voting process for PIP-263. DISCUSS: https://lists.apache.org/thread/tp25lom2ggztljlo76krsldo270f293j PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20445 Thanks Yubiao Feng