Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-231: Add metric for topic load failed

+1 Haiting On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 4:20 PM Jiuming Tao wrote: > > Hello pulsar community, > > I've opened `PIP-231: Add metric for topic load failed` to discuss. > > Motivation: > Currently, we have topic_load_times > metric

Re: [DISCUSS][PIP-226] Add JWKS support for AuthenticationProviderToken

I support adding JWKS retrieval to our Token Auth Provider, and thank you for your many security related contributions, Zixuan. I see your PIP implementation here [0]. I would like to discuss a competing implementation of a similar feature before we move forward with this PIP. I wrote an Authentic

Re: [DISCUSS] [GO-Client] The behavior of Seek is different with Java Client

+1 Thanks for your thorough description of the issue, Jiaqi Shen. I support changing the go client to match the Java client's semantics. Given that we haven't done the 1.0 release of the go client yet, I think a breaking change is acceptable. The release notes should clearly explain the changed b

Re: Too many emails - Is there a better way to control or manage emails from GitBox

I started a new thread to discuss moving GitHub discussion notifications to the commits@ mailing list here: https://lists.apache.org/thread/ny8cz9fj4lwk752m4nylpzdg35lwfn6v. I should have continued on this thread, sorry for breaking it out. - Michael On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 1:12 AM tison wrote:

Re: [DISCUSS] Move GitHub discussion notifications to commits@

> Is it better to point to user@ list? I think we should send these notifications to commits@ because the notifications are only notifications of activity and cannot be responded to directly via email. Also, these notifications do not "thread" correctly in some (all?) email providers, which makes

Re: [DISCUSS] [GO-Client] The behavior of Seek is different with Java Client

+1 for fixing this. The client API semanic should stay consistent between different client languages. Thanks, Haiting On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 5:37 PM Zike Yang wrote: > > Hi Jiaqi, > > Thanks for raising up this discussion. > This is the wrong behavior for the go client, and it will make it > co

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate-3

I've built the tag locally and ran the license check, it seems there are some issues about Pulsar SQL ➜ pulsar2 git:(v2.11.0-candidate-3) ./src/check-binary-license.sh distribution/server/target/apache-pulsar-2.11.0-bin.tar.gz failsafe-2.4.4.jar unaccounted for in lib/presto/LICENSE jersey-entit

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate-3

+1 (binding) - Verified checksums and signatures - Built from source on Mac M1, JDK 17 Temurin - Run Pulsar standalone from the binaries produced by the build - Tested Pulsar shell - Tested the docker image locally, basic smoke tests Thanks Enrico Olivelli Il giorno mer 21 dic 2022 alle ore 1

Re: [DISCUSS] The use of consumer redeliverUnacknowledgedMessages method

Hi, Baodi, >Alternatively, can it be understood that when a user wants to process messages >in an orderly manner, he cannot call the ‘reconumserLater` and >'negativeAcknowledge' >methods? Yes, I think so. This is what the user needs to think about. We need to provide use cases, and notes for us

Re: [DISCUSS] The use of consumer redeliverUnacknowledgedMessages method

Hi, Congbo: > In the above two solutions, it can keep messages in order. but in the > first solution, we don't know how many messages the user process and > then cumulative once. If the message numbers are 1000, maybe the > user can't store the message in the memory for reprocessing. so users