horsteff commented on issue #7492: URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/7492#issuecomment-656769281
@sijie Yes, that's what I had in mind. I'm already working on it and will make a pull request then. One question: After digging a little in the code and thinking about possible fixes I would rather like to drop the `withConfig` method from `PulsarStandaloneBuilder` and replace it with a `withConfigFile` method. I don't see any other way (without major changes), to apply configuration settings without unexpected overwriting and in an order a user would expect. A config file is required in any case and with a `withConfigFile` method the `PulsarStandaloneBuilder` is able to read it in it's `build` method like the `PulsarStandaloneStarter` constructor does, which would fix the second part of this issue. If a user wants to change some config settings by code, it's possible by modifying the `ServiceConfiguration` object of the created `PulsarStandalone` instance after calling `PulsarStandaloneBuilder.build()` and before calling `PulsarStandalone.start()` without the need to create an own `ServiceConfiguration` instance. This would also make clear to the user, that modifying the config object overwrites values set via configuration file (at least those not for the `LocalBookkeeperEnsemble`, but that's another story). Dropping `PulsarStandaloneBuilder.withConfig` shouldn't be such a problem with existing code as currently it effectively does nothing. And it seems that no other user has noticed that. 8) Is this solution ok for you? ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
