Yes, the stream transformation of `topic-1` to `topic-2` is a
heavyweight operation producing completely different information on
topic-2 than is contained on topic-1 (the cardinality is 1-n as well,
not 1-1). The schema evolution I am attempting to perform should have
captured the data at time of write of topic-2 but didn't. It is easily
available in topic-1 though, using some other information in the
payload of topic-2.

Regards,
Raman

On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 12:57 AM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Raman,
>
> What I'm not clear is that since topic-2 is a transformed topic of topic-1
> via "other stream", then why do you still need to join it with topic-1? Or
> in other words, are topic-1 and topic-2 containing different data, or
> topic-2 is just storing similar data of topic-1 but just in different
> format (since it was a transformation result of topic-1 via "other stream")?
>
>
>
> Guozhang
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 4:07 PM Raman Gupta <rocketra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes, I forgot to show an item on the topology:
> >
> >    +-----------> global-ktable +---------+
> >    |                                     |
> >    +                                     v
> > topic-1                                stream +----> topic-3
> >    +                                     ^
> >    |                                     |
> >    +----> other stream +--> topic-2 +----+
> >
> > My use case is a "schema evolution" of the data in topic-2, to produce
> > topic-3 via "stream". In order to perform this schema evolution, I
> > need to pull some attributes from the payloads in topic-1. I can't
> > simply join topic-1 and topic-2 because they do not share keys. The
> > global-ktable allows me to easily look up the values I need from
> > topic-1 using an attribute from the payload of topic-2, and combine
> > those to write to topic-3.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Raman
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:56 PM Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Raman,
> > >
> > > It seems from your case that `topic-1` is used for both the global ktable
> > > as well as another stream, which then be transformed to a new stream that
> > > will be "joined" somehow with the global ktable. Could you elaborate your
> > > case a bit more on why do you want to use the same source topic for two
> > > entities in your topology?
> > >
> > >
> > > Guozhang
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:41 PM Raman Gupta <rocketra...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have a topology like this:
> > > >
> > > >    +-----------> global-ktable +---------+
> > > >    |                                     |
> > > >    +                                     v
> > > > topic-1                                stream
> > > >    +                                     ^
> > > >    |                                     |
> > > >    +----> other stream +--> topic-2 +----+
> > > >
> > > > IOW, a global ktable is built from topic-1. Meanwhile, "other stream"
> > > > transforms topic-1 to topic-2. Finally, "stream" operators on topic-2,
> > > > and as part of its logic, reads data from "global-ktable".
> > > >
> > > > I am worried about the race condition present in "stream" between the
> > > > message showing up on topic-2, and the "get" from "global-ktable". Is
> > > > there a way, other than retrying the `get`, to avoid this race?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Raman
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -- Guozhang
> >
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang

Reply via email to