This helps some. W’re planning to write a non-homogeneous set of records to a single topic (to preserve order). There would be no compatibility between records of different types. I assume that if I set the schema compatibility for this subject to “none” this would not be a problem. (can you confirm?)
Also of potential concern is deduplication. If I write type R1, R2, R3, R4, R2, R1, … etc., will I only have 4 resulting schemas in the registry? I see that it’s using a caching class to access the registry, but this needs to be across many jobs. I suppose I’ll be sorting this out as I test, but any insight ahead of time is appreciated. > On Jan 30, 2017, at 7:13 AM, Gerard Klijs <ger...@openweb.nl> wrote: > > Not really, as you can update the schema, and have multiple of them at the > same time. By default each schema has to backwards compatible, so you do > have to exclude the specific topic you use with different schema's. With > every write, the 'id' of the schema used is also written, so when you > deserialise the messages, you know which schema to use for which message. > > Op zo 29 jan. 2017 om 17:35 schreef Mike Cargal <m...@cargal.net>: > >> I was just looking into using KafkaAvroSerializer to produce records to a >> Kafka topic. We are interested because the wire format has a reference to >> the schema so we don’t have to schema lookup information independently. >> >> We plan to keep a single topic that contain records using many different >> schemas (it’s important to maintain the ordering of these records). >> >> In looking at the code, it appears that it registers the schema with the >> registry with a topic+”-topic” subject. This would seem to imply an >> assumption that a topic has a single schema associated with it (not many >> schemas that can vary from record to record). >> >> Am I understanding this correctly? It seems like a surprising constraint.
