Adding an enum is a good idea!
Wondering if `UNORDERED` is the best name? Want to avoid bike shedding,
just asking.
We could also use `UNDEFINED` / `UNSPECIFIED` / `NONE` / `ANY` ?
In the end, the result _might_ be ordered, we just don't guarantee any
order.
-Matthias
On 11/20/23 9:17 AM, Alieh Saeedi wrote:
Hi all,
I added the public enum `ResultOrder` to the KIP which helps with keeping
three values (unordered, ascending, and descending) for the query results.
Therefore the method `isAscending()` is changed to `resultOrder()` which
returns either the user specified result order or `unorderd`.
Cheers,
Alieh
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 1:40 PM Alieh Saeedi <asae...@confluent.io> wrote:
Thank you, Guozhag and Bruno, for reviewing the KIP and reading the whole
discussion thread. I appreciate your help:)
The KIP is now corrected and updated.
Cheers,
Alieh
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:43 AM Bruno Cadonna <cado...@apache.org> wrote:
Thanks Alieh,
I am +1 (binding).
However, although we agreed on not specifying an order of the results by
default, there is still the following sentence in the KIP:
"The order of the returned records is by default ascending by timestamp.
The method withDescendingTimestamps() can reverse the order. Btw,
withAscendingTimestamps() method can be used for code readability
purpose. "
Could you please change it and also fix what Guozhang commented?
Best,
Bruno
On 11/19/23 2:12 AM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
Thanks Alieh,
I read through the wiki page and the DISCUSS thread, all LGTM except a
minor thing in javadoc:
"The query returns the records with a global ascending order of keys.
The records with the same key are ordered based on their insertion
timestamp in ascending order. Both the global and partial ordering are
modifiable with the corresponding methods defined for the class."
Since this KIP is only for a single key, there's no key ordering but
only timestamp ordering right? Maybe the javadoc can be updated
accordingly.
Otherwise, LGTM.
On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 2:36 AM Alieh Saeedi
<asae...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
Hi all,
Following my recent message in the discussion thread, I am opening the
voting for KIP-968. Thanks for your votes in advance.
Cheers,
Alieh
