RobertIndie commented on a change in pull request #12403:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12403#discussion_r759005680
##########
File path:
pulsar-client/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/client/impl/ConsumerImpl.java
##########
@@ -1975,6 +1982,9 @@ public void seek(Function<String, Object> function)
throws PulsarClientException
ackSet.recycle();
seek = Commands.newSeek(consumerId, requestId,
msgId.getLedgerId(), msgId.getEntryId(), ackSetArr);
+ } else if(messageId instanceof ChunkMessageIdImpl){
+ ChunkMessageIdImpl msgId = (ChunkMessageIdImpl) messageId;
+ seek = Commands.newSeek(consumerId, requestId,
msgId.getFirstChunkMessageId().getLedgerId(),
msgId.getFirstChunkMessageId().getEntryId(), new long[0]);
Review comment:
As I explained
earlier([here](https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12403#discussion_r756558399)
and
[here](https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12403#discussion_r747272455)), the
Consumer does not depend on the first chunk message-id set by the producer.
[Here](https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12403/files#r759004547) is the
comment to illustrate where the consumer sets the chunk message-id. Is there
something wrong with my explanation?
> `you can't give guarantee to set firstChunkMessageId in any chunk of the
message.`
Why do we need that guarantee? I think this is the key point of our
discussion. The consumer does not rely on this guarantee.
--
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]
