Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hello everyone, The KIP-862 vote has passed with: binding +1s (John, Guozhang, Bruno) non-binding +1s (Jim) Thank you everyone for reviewing the KIP and voting. Best, Vicky On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 11:44 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote: > Hi Vicky, > > Thanks for the KIP! > > I think the KIP looks

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hi Vicky, Thanks for the KIP! I think the KIP looks good! You described how the self-join is optimized when the names of the state stores are automatically generated by Streams. I think for completeness you should also mention what happens when users explicitly name the state stores of the

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hi Vicky, I'm +1 (non-binding); thanks for the KIP (and PR)! Cheers, Jim On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 12:05 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thank Vicky! I'm +1. > > Guozhang > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 7:02 PM John Roesler wrote: > > > Thanks for the updates, Vicky! > > > > I've reviewed the KIP and

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Thank Vicky! I'm +1. Guozhang On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 7:02 PM John Roesler wrote: > Thanks for the updates, Vicky! > > I've reviewed the KIP and your POC PR, > and I'm +1 (binding). > > Thanks! > -John > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022, at 09:13, Vasiliki Papavasileiou wrote: > > Hey Guozhang, > > > >

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Thanks for the updates, Vicky! I've reviewed the KIP and your POC PR, and I'm +1 (binding). Thanks! -John On Mon, Sep 12, 2022, at 09:13, Vasiliki Papavasileiou wrote: > Hey Guozhang, > > Great suggestion, I made the change. > > Best, > Vicky > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:43 PM Guozhang Wang

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hey Guozhang, Great suggestion, I made the change. Best, Vicky On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:43 PM Guozhang Wang wrote: > Thanks Vicky, that reads much clearer now. > > Just regarding the value string name itself: "self.join" may be confusing > compared to other values that people would think

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Thanks Vicky, that reads much clearer now. Just regarding the value string name itself: "self.join" may be confusing compared to other values that people would think before this config is enabled, self-join are not allowed at all. Maybe we can rename it to "single.store.self.join"? Guozhang On

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hey Guozhang, Ah it seems my text was not very clear :) With "TOPOLOGY_OPTIMIZATION_CONFIG will be extended to accept a list of optimization rule configs" I meant that it will accept the new value strings for each optimization rule. Let me rephrase that in the KIP to make it clearer. Is it better

Re: [VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Thanks Vicky, I read through the KIP again and it looks good to me. Just a quick question regarding the public config changes: you mentioned "No public interfaces will be impacted. The config TOPOLOGY_OPTIMIZATION_CONFIG will be extended to accept a list of optimization rule configs in addition

[VOTE] KIP-862: Self-join optimization for stream-stream joins

Hello everyone, I'd like to open the vote for KIP-862, which proposes to optimize stream-stream self-joins by using a single state store for the join. The proposal is here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-862%3A+Self-join+optimization+for+stream-stream+joins Thanks to all