poorbarcode commented on code in PR #21600:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21600#discussion_r1449897315
##########
pulsar-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/admin/impl/PersistentTopicsBase.java:
##########
@@ -2882,28 +2882,47 @@ protected CompletableFuture<MessageId>
internalGetMessageIdByTimestampAsync(long
throw new RestException(Status.METHOD_NOT_ALLOWED,
"Get message ID by timestamp on a non-persistent topic
is not allowed");
}
- ManagedLedger ledger = ((PersistentTopic)
topic).getManagedLedger();
- return ledger.asyncFindPosition(entry -> {
- try {
- long entryTimestamp =
Commands.getEntryTimestamp(entry.getDataBuffer());
- return
MessageImpl.isEntryPublishedEarlierThan(entryTimestamp, timestamp);
- } catch (Exception e) {
- log.error("[{}] Error deserializing message for
message position find", topicName, e);
- } finally {
- entry.release();
- }
- return false;
- }).thenApply(position -> {
- if (position == null) {
- return null;
- } else {
- return new MessageIdImpl(position.getLedgerId(),
position.getEntryId(),
- topicName.getPartitionIndex());
- }
- });
+ return ((PersistentTopic)
topic).getTopicCompactionService().findEntryByPublishTime(timestamp)
Review Comment:
Maybe use the `compactedTopicContext` to determine whether reading data from
the original `ML` or the ledger containing the data compacted is better.
Because if the `@param timestamp` is nearly, and there is considerable data in
the ledger containing the data compacted, it costs too much.
--
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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
