;> > > > > > > here.
> > >> > > > > > > > > :)
> > >> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >
{
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> private Set objects =
> >> > > > > > > > > Collections.synchronizedSet(new
> >> > >
private boolean
>> isMethodCallInProgress(Object
>> > > x) {
>> > > > > > > > > > > >> return objects.contains(x);
>> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> if (GUARD.isMethodCallInProgress(this))
> {
> > > > > > > > > > > >> throw new IllegalStateException("You
> > > must
> > > > > > > > implement
> > > > > > > > &g
GUARD.methodCallInProgress(this);
> > > > > > > > > > >> return supplier.get();
> > > > > > > > > > >> } finally {
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > GUARD.clearMethodCallInPro
>> }
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Guard GUARD = new Guard();
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> void c
ull,
> > > > data));
> > > > > > > > >> }
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> default T deserialize(String topic, Headers headers,
> > > byte[]
> > > > > &
> > >>
> > > > > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > > > > >> Viktor
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 3:50 PM Ismael Juma <
> > ism...@juma.
gt; > > > >> > Ismael
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 6:48 AM Ismael Juma <
> > ism...@juma.me.uk>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > >
t; > > >> > > detail. For example, another option would be something like
> > the
> > > > > >> > following,
> > > > > >> > > which works great as long as one overrides one of the
> methods,
> > > but
> &g
> > > //
> > > > >> > > This is the new method
> > > > >> > > return deserialize(topic, data);
> > > > >> > > }
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >>
t; Thanks for the feedback.
> > > >> > >> 1. I chose to return null here because according to the
> > > >> documentation it
> > > >> > >> may return null data, therefore the users of this methods are
> > > >> perpared
of this methods are
> > >> perpared
> > >> > for
> > >> > >> getting a null. Thinking of it though it may be better to throw
> an
> > >> > >> exception by default because it'd indicate a programming error.
> > >> However,
> > >
t; > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-331+
> >> Add+default+implementation+to+close%28%29+and+configure%28%
> >> 29+for+Serializer%2C+Deserializer+and+Serde
> >> > >
>> 29+for+Serializer%2C+Deserializer+and+Serde
>> > >>
>> > >> Cheers,
>> > >> Viktor
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 6:11 PM Jason Gustafson
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Hey
,
> > >> > would it be better to throw UnsupportedOperationException? I assume
> > that
> > >> > internally we'll always invoke the api which takes headers.
> Similarly
> > >> for
> > >> > `serialize(topic, data)`.
> > >&g
>> for
> >> > `serialize(topic, data)`.
> >> > 2. Would it make sense to have default no-op implementations for
> >> > `configure` and `close`?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Jason
> >> >
> >> > On Wed
;> > `configure` and `close`?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Jason
>> >
>> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Satish Duggana <
>> satish.dugg...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>
atish.dugg...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > > Original message From: Kamal Chandraprakash <
>
> > > +1
> > > Original message From: Kamal Chandraprakash <
> > > kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> Date: 8/22/18 3:19 AM (GMT-08:00)
> To:
> > > dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-336: Consolidate
> > > ExtendedSerializer/Seri
sage From: Kamal Chandraprakash <
> > kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> Date: 8/22/18 3:19 AM (GMT-08:00) To:
> > dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-336: Consolidate
> > ExtendedSerializer/Serializer and ExtendedDeserializer/Deserializer
> > +1
> >
+1
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
> +1
> Original message From: Kamal Chandraprakash <
> kamal.chandraprak...@gmail.com> Date: 8/22/18 3:19 AM (GMT-08:00) To:
> dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-336: Consolidate
> Extended
+1
Original message From: Kamal Chandraprakash
Date: 8/22/18 3:19 AM (GMT-08:00) To:
dev@kafka.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-336: Consolidate
ExtendedSerializer/Serializer and ExtendedDeserializer/Deserializer
+1
Thanks for the KIP!
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:48 PM
+1
Thanks for the KIP!
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:48 PM Viktor Somogyi-Vass
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'd like to start a vote on this KIP (
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=87298242)
> which aims to refactor ExtendedSerializer/Serializer and
>
Hi All,
I'd like to start a vote on this KIP (
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=87298242)
which aims to refactor ExtendedSerializer/Serializer and
ExtendedDeserializer/Deserializer.
To summarize what's the motivation:
When headers were introduced by KIP-82 the
25 matches
Mail list logo
