The proposal is going to add third-party schema registry integration with the Pulsar client. The management API will be provided by a third-party schema registry, e,g. Confluent schema registry. Pulsar-admin API will not manage the Confluent schema registry.
Regards, Penghui On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 6:58 PM SiNan Liu <liusinan1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't seem to have seen any description of the relevant behaviour of > admin api. > > What should we do when calling pulsar-admin schemas get <topic-name>. > > > Thanks, > sinan > > > PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org>于2025年6月24日 周二05:02写道： > > > Hi Ran, > > > > Thanks for adding the compatibility explanation and the new schema type. > > The proposal looks good to me. > > > > Regards, > > Penghui > > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 2:47 AM Ran Gao <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the suggestions, I'll add them to the PIP. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Ran Gao > > > > > > On 2025/06/03 00:15:58 PengHui Li wrote: > > > > Thanks for the proposal. > > > > > > > > The motivation looks good to me, users can connect to their preferred > > or > > > > customized schema registry with this proposal, which can get rid of > the > > > > limitation from the Pulsar built-in schema registry. > > > > > > > > I have a few questions about the migration or compatibility. > > > > > > > > - For a topic that already uses pulsar's built-in schema, will the > > client > > > > be able to switch to an external schema registry? As I understand, we > > > > should reject this case since it will mess up the schema > compatibility > > > with > > > > 2 schema registries > > > > - And how about the old version(without external schema registry > > support) > > > > consumers connected to the topic that has schema from external schema > > > > registry? > > > > > > > > We probably need to consider adding another schema type instead of > > using > > > > the bytes schema. If the topic has a schema from an external schema > > > > registry, which means the Pulsar broker will not manage schemas for > > this > > > > topic. > > > > > > > > We should add more details about the compatibility to let users > > > understand > > > > the proper way to move to the external schema registry. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Penghui > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 9:23 AM Ran Gao <r...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Pulsar Community. > > > > > > > > > > I opened a new PIP to provide the Pulsar client with the ability to > > > > > integrate with a third-party schema registry service. I'm looking > > > > > forward to your suggestions! > > > > > > > > > > link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/24328 > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Ran Gao > > > > > >
