> On Dec 1, 2021, at 10:21 AM, Michael Marshall wrote:
>
> Following up here, I am still in need of reviews for PR [0]. It
> introduces an important clarification to the Pulsar Protocol Spec.
> Please take a look, if you are able.
>
> [0] - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12948
I added
Following up here, I am still in need of reviews for PR [0]. It
introduces an important clarification to the Pulsar Protocol Spec.
Please take a look, if you are able.
[0] - https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12948
Thanks!
Michael
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 1:10 PM Michael Marshall wrote:
>
> I
I created a PR to update the protocol's documentation:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12948. Please take a look, if
you're able.
Once this PR is accepted/merged, I will follow up with an update to
the Java client.
- Michael
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:29 PM Michael Marshall wrote:
>
> I vi
I view this as an edge case of the Pulsar Protocol that requires
clarification. Once we clarify the spec, we can update the clients to
conform to the spec. I don't think we need to give end users control
over this small part of the protocol.
After reviewing the design a bit more, I think we should
How about making the behavior when timeout configurable? And by default, it
will send the `CloseProducer` cmd?
On 2021/11/17 05:52:21 Michael Marshall wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I noticed that the `ServerCnxTest#testCreateProducerTimeout` test
> indicates that a producer will send a `CloserProducer` c
