Why was there such urgency in merging a proposal and implementation that introduces significant changes to the hot path?
Both the proposal and implementation PR received just one approval, despite containing a substantial number of changes: +2,315 / −1,450 lines. Since that initial approval, 11 additional commits have been pushed to the PR. Who reviewed these 11 commits? Were they adequately reviewed given the scope and impact of the changes? > Thank you, Penghui. This is a vote thread, so we can handle this concern separately once the work proceeds in implementation PRs. Ok, my bad. I will give my explicit -1 next time. The proposal needs to add the configuration change, no? Please take https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15955/files#diff-1e63fb74fd8bcabf5320f10d72ea893e1ce72cbb5b7f55a49460674d905c09c7R1063 for example. Thanks, Penghui On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 4:55 AM Lari Hotari <lhot...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello all, > > The vote for "PIP-430: Pulsar Broker cache improvements: refactoring > eviction and adding a new cache strategy based on expected read count" is > now closed. > > The vote PASSED with 3 binding "+1" votes. > > -Lari > > On 2025/07/24 13:46:41 Lari Hotari wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to start the voting thread for "PIP-430: Pulsar Broker cache > > improvements: refactoring eviction and adding a new cache strategy > > based on expected read count". > > > > Proposal PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/24444 > > Rendered PIP document: > > https://github.com/lhotari/pulsar/blob/lh-pip-430/pip/pip-430.md > > Discussion thread: > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/o1ozbg468kxfd38pxk2ppzsstdnxnok2 > > > > Please review the PIP document and vote! > > The vote will stay open for at least 48 hours. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Lari > > >
