Hi Calvin, Thanks for the update.
DJ03: I wonder whether we should call it `TransactionalIdPattern`. Filter is a bit redundant in my opinion. DJ04: The response could now return `INVALID_REGULAR_EXPRESSION` error if the regex is invalid. DJ05: Should we say that all transactions are returned if the pattern is null instead of empty? Or do we want to do it for both null and empty? DJ06: In the motivation, could you please explain that the pattern will rely on re2j like KIP-848? Or you could actually add this to the "Proposed Changes" section which misses in the current KIP. Best, David On Sat, Apr 5, 2025 at 5:42 PM Calvin Liu <ca...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > Hi Chia-Ping, > Sure, I updated the field to be nullable. > Thanks > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 9:54 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <chia7...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Do you mean the TransactionalIdPatternFilter in the ListTransaction > > request > > can be nullable? > > > > Yes, and the null means “all transaction ids” > > > > Best, > > Chia-Ping > > > > > > > Calvin Liu <ca...@confluent.io.invalid> 於 2025年4月5日 凌晨2:35 寫道： > > > > > > Do you mean the TransactionalIdPatternFilter in the ListTransaction > > request > > > can be nullable? > > >
