VisualBean commented on issue #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-dotpulsar/issues/92#issuecomment-950636235
It appears there are 2 flows according to one of the original Pulsar
creators Matteo Merli.
There is the AuthenticationProvider, which that's sends a request to the
client
VisualBean edited a comment on issue #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-dotpulsar/issues/92#issuecomment-950636235
It appears there are 2 flows according to one of the original Pulsar
creators Matteo Merli.
There is the AuthenticationProvider, which that's sends a request to the
blankensteiner commented on issue #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-dotpulsar/issues/92#issuecomment-950651849
Hi @VisualBean
Thanks for the research!
I think we need proper support for this, meaning that we support
re-validation of the token on the fly (didn't know that was
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12479
--- Pasted here for quoting convenience ---
## Motivation
Currently, I have an application that manages ten thousand of consumers,
and a logic to schedule consumers's receive. It would be helpful to know if
one of the consumers have message to recive.
pr-bot-test closed pull request #22:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-test-infra/pull/22
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-
fengtao1998 commented on pull request #23:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-test-infra/pull/23#issuecomment-950833808
@Anonymitaet @eolivelli PTAL
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
eolivelli merged pull request #23:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-test-infra/pull/23
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-un
VisualBean commented on issue #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-dotpulsar/issues/92#issuecomment-951003820
Followup for the broker side checking expiry.
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/464a9cdc21609189771f1d95ac211b69eca1454c/pulsar-broker-common/src/main/java/org/apache/p
pancudaniel7 opened a new issue #167:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-helm-chart/issues/167
**Describe the bug**
I've follow minikube pulsar installation for version v1.16.1 and after
installing the the chart with minikube values I got pods freeze state.
**To Reproduce**
I've occasionally run into situations where I needed a list of all the
topics in a cluster.
If I want to submit a PR to add something to one of the endpoints to return
a list of all topics in a cluster, what part of the API should that go
under?
e.g. bin/pulsar-admin tenants list-all-topics
Devin,
Il Lun 25 Ott 2021, 23:05 Devin Bost ha scritto:
> I've occasionally run into situations where I needed a list of all the
> topics in a cluster.
> If I want to submit a PR to add something to one of the endpoints to return
> a list of all topics in a cluster, what part of the API should t
LGTM +1
Thanks,
Penghui
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 7:25 PM ZJ H wrote:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12479
>
> --- Pasted here for quoting convenience ---
>
> ## Motivation
> Currently, I have an application that manages ten thousand of consumers,
> and a logic to schedule consumers's
Can this method
"org.apache.pulsar.client.impl.ConsumerBase#getTotalIncomingMessages" do the
trick? Though you have to change the type to ConsumerBase.
And maybe `peek` is more suitable and useful to add to the Consumer interface??
-- Original --
From:
I think it's better to add the method to Consumer interface instead of let
user casting it to `ConsumerBase`.
`peek` is most complexly, for the reason, I can use the `peek` object to
ack、negative ack, but when to remove from the `BlockingQueue`?
IMHO, people use this api are just to judge if has t
I'm a bit hesitant about this because I think there are already at
least 3 different ways to handle similar scenarios.
1. Using listener and avoid calling receive directly
2. Use multi-topic consumer, so there's a single `Consumer` instance exposed
3. Use `consumer.receive(0, TimeUnit.SECONDS)`
3. Our solution implements the distributed flow control ability at client
side, so we don't use the listener way.
2. Per customer per consumer in different tenants and namespace, and the
`flow-control` need(Some of our customer's machines can't work on high
traffic), So `Multi-topic` can't use.
1.
I'm totally +1 for the feature to check if we can get message immediately
from consumer, this is to say we have message locally.
In my understanding, it's useful to implement some user-defined order to
consume messages among different topics, in your case, the "distributed flow
control ability
If some users need the message content to do user-defined actions, we need
to ensure the user can't use the `peekMessage` to do things like ack
because the message are still in the blockingQueue, return just a
content-copy?
introduced `localBuffer` might be good ? `hasMessagesInLocalBuffer`
Jiang
18 matches
Mail list logo
