Thank you for your comments. I took a look at this. There are a few questions.
1. Compared with my proposal to directly add new functions in pulsar-client, the implementation in this repo is through two topics, one request topic and one reply topic. The producer sends the message to the request topic, the consumer processes it, the consumer sends it to the reply topic, and the producer subscribes to the reply topic. Such a call would have a long link and lose performance. This is also the downside of the external repo wrapping the pulsar-client api directly, which it can only do. And that's not in my proposal. After the consumer processes the request Message, it passes it to the broker through a new ack implementation, and the broker passes the reply result directly to the client (producer). 2. In my proposal, request and the existing send function of pulsar can be mixed. This means that the user can choose, and the call to the server side (consumer) can be asynchronous or synchronous, which is controlled by the user flexibly. 3. The use examples of the new api are provided in the detailed design of my proposal. Users use it just like pulsar's existing send functionality, without the need to introduce additional encapsulation implementations. 4. Of course, the changes made in this proposal do not actually change the existing pulsar api, but rather wrap it internally. For example, request api. Call the existing send function directly, get the request MessageID, and wait for the reply response within the timeout period. The new ack api simply sends a reply result to the broker, which then sends it to the client, after which the existing ack api is called directly. Thanks, sinan Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org>于2024年8月8日 周四23:42写道： > Thanks for the proposal! > > Instead of modifying the existing Pulsar client library, I think it's > better to create a separate library. The request-reply / rpc model can be > implemented on top of the Pulsar client instead of making the support for > request-reply a first class citizen of the client API. > There's an example of a Pulsar based RPC framework at > https://github.com/streamnative/pulsar-recipes/tree/main/rpc . > > We'd like to keep the Pulsar client library API as stable as possible and > without increasing the size of it. The RPC library could be considered as a > plugin or an add-on if we were to make it available in the Apache Pulsar > project. I'll be happy to support this type of design. > > -Lari > > > On 2024/08/08 15:09:17 SiNan Liu wrote: > > Hi all. > > > > I drafted a proposal to support for request-reply model that implements > RPC > > calls in pulsar. > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/23143 > > I'm looking forward to hearing from you. > > > > > > Thanks, > > sinan > > >
