alpreu opened a new pull request, #19004:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19004
<!--
### Contribution Checklist
- PR title format should be *[type][component] summary*. For details, see
*[Guideline - Pulsar PR Naming
Convention](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d8Pw6ZbWk-_pCKdOmdvx9rnhPiyuxwq60_TrD68d7BA/edit#heading=h.trs9rsex3xom)*.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
-->
### Motivation
Currently the Debezium sources don't support loading sensitive configuration
from secrets.
### Modifications
Most sources can rely on `IOConfigUtils.loadWithSecrets` because they
provide a specific Config class with `FieldDoc` annotations. The Debezium
sources work differently because there is no specific Config class but rather
just a Map with some basic validation that is passed to Debezium. Therefore we
need to directly get the secrets from the `sourceContext`.
Most of the Debezium sources rely on the same config properties
(`database.user`, `database.password`) to configure the connector so I decided
to move the secret-handling code into the abstract `DebeziumSource` class that
all the individual connectors inherit from. There are exceptions to this, such
as the MongoDB source, which uses another set of config properties (e.g.
`mongodb.user` instead of `database.user`), these sources will have to call the
secret-handling code by overriding the `open` method.
### Verifying this change
- [ ] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
I would be open to adding a unit test as well, but I feel it does not add a
lot of value because the sourceContext already has unit tests for this
functionality.
### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
<!-- DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION. CHECK THE PROPER BOX ONLY. -->
*If the box was checked, please highlight the changes*
- [ ] Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
- [ ] The public API
- [ ] The schema
- [ ] The default values of configurations
- [ ] The threading model
- [ ] The binary protocol
- [ ] The REST endpoints
- [ ] The admin CLI options
- [ ] The metrics
- [ ] Anything that affects deployment
### Documentation
<!-- DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION. CHECK THE PROPER BOX ONLY. -->
- [ ] `doc` <!-- Your PR contains doc changes. Please attach the local
preview screenshots (run `sh start.sh` at `pulsar/site2/website`) to your PR
description, or else your PR might not get merged. -->
- [ ] `doc-required` <!-- Your PR changes impact docs and you will update
later -->
- [x] `doc-not-needed` <!-- Your PR changes do not impact docs -->
- [ ] `doc-complete` <!-- Docs have been already added -->
### Matching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: https://github.com/alpreu/pulsar/pull/4
<!--
After opening this PR, the build in apache/pulsar will fail and instructions
will
be provided for opening a PR in the PR author's forked repository.
apache/pulsar pull requests should be first tested in your own fork since
the
apache/pulsar CI based on GitHub Actions has constrained resources and quota.
GitHub Actions provides separate quota for pull requests that are executed
in
a forked repository.
The tests will be run in the forked repository until all PR review comments
have
been handled, the tests pass and the PR is approved by a reviewer.
-->
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
