4. I did not observe any changes made to the KIP about this. Could we please add a JavaDoc to serializeToByteBuffer() where we clearly call out that the indices of input ByteBuffer will be modified.
5. Thank you. My comment on this is resolved now. 6. We should probably mention the strategy to reconcile serializeToByteBuffer() and serialize() in the KIP. It may look like, in 3.x versions, both exist and starting 4.0, serializeToByteBuffer() is removed and it replaces the implementation of serialize() which will return ByteBuffer by default. 7. I agree with what Ismael mentioned. We need to clearly mention in the motivation section about the cases which would be optimized. We are reducing array allocation and data copy. But we are reducing this only in cases where the input ByteBuffer does not satisfy the condition (data.arrayOffset() == 0 && arr.length == data.remaining()). -- Divij Vaidya On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 6:24 AM ShunKang Lin <linshunkang....@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for your comment, Divij. > > 4. Do you still have any questions about #4? > > 5. I add test case for ByteBufferSerializer backward compatibility: > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12685/commits/393af38c27ec8d810a2326ac4b89a53b177e3ee1 > > Best, > ShunKang > > Divij Vaidya <divijvaidy...@gmail.com> 于2023年4月19日周三 00:45写道： > > > 3. Ok. Seems like there is no way around to enforce better semantics and > > maintain backward compatibility as well! Let's go ahead with what you > > proposed and create a JIRA to fix the semantics in version 4.x. My > comment > > is resolved here. > > > > -- > > Divij Vaidya > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 6:47 AM ShunKang Lin <linshunkang....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for your comment. > > > > > > This KIP does not modify ByteBufferSerializer#serialize(), so do we > need > > to > > > clarify this aspect on motivation? > > > > > > Best, > > > ShunKang > > > > > > Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk>于2023年4月10日 周一12:37写道： > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > One interesting aspect is that the current `ByteBufferSerializer` > > avoids > > > > copies in the following case: > > > > > > > > if (data.hasArray()) { > > > > final byte[] arr = data.array(); > > > > if (data.arrayOffset() == 0 && arr.length == data.remaining()) { > > > > return arr; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > > > > > It would be good to clarify this aspect in the motivation. What kind > of > > > > copies would we avoid (eg direct byte buffers, byte buffer views, > > etc.). > > > > > > > > Ismael > > > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 8:59 AM ShunKang Lin < > > linshunkang....@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi all, I'd like to start a new discussion thread on KIP-872 (Kafka > > > > Client) > > > > > which proposes that add Serializer#serializeToByteBuffer() to > reduce > > > > memory > > > > > copying. > > > > > > > > > > KIP: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=228495828 > > > > > Thanks, ShunKang > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
