I think we have reached lazy consensus on this topic. I marked my PR
as "Ready for Review" and I will merge it once I get tests passing.
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20279
Thanks,
Michael
On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 12:40 PM Michael Marshall wrote:
>
> I just had a flaky test failure due to
I just had a flaky test failure due to the streaming dispatcher, so I
decided to move this discussion along by creating a PR to do what
Enrico proposed [0].
Do we need to discuss this any further before making the PR "ready for
review" and removing the streaming dispatcher?
> Shouldn't it first b
Shouldn't it first be deprecated before removal ?
Le mar. 4 avr. 2023 à 08:47, Enrico Olivelli a écrit :
>
> Hello,
> It has been a long time that we have in the Pulsar code a new
> experimental Dispatcher implementation named StreamingDispatcher.
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/9056
>
Hi all,
+1 for removing the StreamingDispatcher in Pulsar 3.0. Balancing
maintainability, scalability, and usability is critical for an open-source
project. In this case, the StreamingDispatcher seems to be neither widely
adopted nor actively maintained, and its code quality and unstable tests
hav
+1, I support removing it if the code isn't being used or maintained.
Thanks,
Cong Zhao
On 2023/04/04 06:47:24 Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> Hello,
> It has been a long time that we have in the Pulsar code a new
> experimental Dispatcher implementation named StreamingDispatcher.
>
> https://github.co
+1 for the reason that it was added when there is no PIP restriction
for new APIs. The original author has left the community for some time
and recently it seems that no one touched the code except for some
necessary API changes.
Thanks,
Yunze
On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 11:48 AM wrote:
>
> Totally a
Totally agree with it. +1
Best
Mattison
On Apr 6, 2023, 10:53 +0800, Devin Bost , wrote:
> +1 since it can be pulled back up in git history if someone decides to do
> something with it to improve it at a later time.
>
> I also agree that it's a pain to maintain, and I don't know anyone using
> it.
+1 since it can be pulled back up in git history if someone decides to do
something with it to improve it at a later time.
I also agree that it's a pain to maintain, and I don't know anyone using
it. I've gone through some of those code paths, and I was concerned about
divergence anyway.
- Devin
If the code isn't being used or maintained, I support removing it. The
code will be available in the git history in case someone decides to
resurrect it.
Thanks,
Michael
On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 7:14 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote:
>
> Yunze,
>
> Il Mar 4 Apr 2023, 09:57 Yunze Xu ha scritto:
>
> > If t
Yunze,
Il Mar 4 Apr 2023, 09:57 Yunze Xu ha scritto:
> If the flaky tests were the only concern, I think we can just disable
> these tests.
My concern is not about the the flaky tests but a out maintenance of dead
code.
Whatever, this config in `ServiceConfiguration` has
> existed for a lon
It looks like the purpose of the StreamingDispatcher was to improve
performance by implementing an improved readahead mechanism. Was it
actually able to accomplish this objective? If so, why do we need a
separate code path for it instead of updating the existing dispatcher to
use the improvement? I
If the flaky tests were the only concern, I think we can just disable
these tests. Whatever, this config in `ServiceConfiguration` has
existed for a long time, though when it was introduced, the PIP rule
was not clear so there is no PIP for it.
Thanks,
Yunze
On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 3:09 PM Gavin g
+1, I totally agree with this idea.
Enrico Olivelli 于2023年4月4日周二 14:47写道：
> Hello,
> It has been a long time that we have in the Pulsar code a new
> experimental Dispatcher implementation named StreamingDispatcher.
>
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/9056
>
> There are many flaky tests abo
Hello,
It has been a long time that we have in the Pulsar code a new
experimental Dispatcher implementation named StreamingDispatcher.
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/9056
There are many flaky tests about that feature and I believe that it
has never been used in Production by anyone, becaus
14 matches
Mail list logo
