Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Tests are running https://travis-ci.org/rmetzger/flink/builds/166441047
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Thank you for the review. I'll address your comments, rebase again, test
it, and if it turns green merge it ;)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Just found some minor issues that can be fixed when merging.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@rmetzger Thanks for addressing the comments! Did a final pass, and the
changes look good to me.
I agree with merging the connector as is. Adding the timestamp to the
regular sink interface
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@tzulitai I addressed all your comments except the one relating
`FlinkKafkaProducer010Configuration`: I had a quick offline discussion with
@StephanEwen about the issue and he suggested to add the
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
I'm currently working on rebasing the PR and addressing the comments.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@cjstehno I would expect this to be in the 1.2.0 major release, which would
probably be ~2 months from now according to Flink's past release cycle. The
Flink community usually doesn't release major
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Looks like we need to rebase this PR on the recently merged Kerberos
support.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user cjstehno commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Any thoughts on when this might make it into a release? We are having
issues running Flink with Kafka 0.10 and would like to have an idea of whether
we can/should wait for this or pull it and try
Github user nemccarthy commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
+1 for this pr
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Thanks Robert for addressing my comments :)
Overall, I like the new hybrid producer approach. However, I'm still
curious whether or not it is possible / reasonable to drop the
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@tzulitai I've addressed your comments.
The Producer is now "hybrid": you can use it with both invocation methods.
The AbstractFetcher now accepts a long timestamp instead of a record.
---
Github user eliaslevy commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@rmetzger that's the one. NP. I realize breaking it up makes things
easier. I just thought I'd mention it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@eliaslevy, I assume you are referring to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-4050.
Its good that you are mentioning the issue again, so I can move it a bit up
on my TODO list.
Github user eliaslevy commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
This may be the wrong place to bring this up, but as you are discussing
changes to the Kafka connector API, I think it is worth bring it up.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the current
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Thank you for the review @tzulitai. I'll try to find some time soon to look
into your comments in detail.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user rmetzger commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
@StephanEwen: The explicit exclude is actually not needed, because the
kafka version defined in the connector has precedence over transitive kafka
versions.
```
[INFO] ---
Github user tzulitai commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Left a few comments on some high-level design choices for a first review.
Mostly on `FlinkKafkaProducer010`, I wonder if there are other better
possibilities over there?
---
If your project is
Github user StephanEwen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2369
Just looked over this briefly.
What struck me first is that this again uses the dirty trick of adding a
dependency to "Flink Kafka 0.9" and then transitively excluding "Kafka 0.9". Is
there
19 matches
Mail list logo
