merlimat commented on pull request #12776:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12776#issuecomment-969557911
> @merlimat We already have a metadata interface, so I think `add rocksdb as
an option` is not much difference with `remove zookeeper`. If people who use
zookeeper standalone for production, they can still use zookeeper standalone.
Or they have to migrate the metadata from zookeeper to rocksdb. What do you
think?
That's outside the scope of this PR and a full proposal would have to be
submitted for this.
My short form opinion is:
* If a standalone Pulsar is already there, keep using the existing format
with ZooKeeper
* If starting a fresh Standalone, default to RocksDb for metadata and
Functions state store. Also, use local FS for storing functions jars
* If user configure to use ZK, keep using ZK.
--
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: commits-unsubscr...@pulsar.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
