[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-4436?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15708608#comment-15708608
]
Tommy Becker commented on KAFKA-4436:
-------------------------------------
FWIW, I would be in favor of doing this for all configs; it's much more
elegant, discoverable, and less error prone than the current method of wrapping
a Map<?, ?> with the config object.
> Provide builder pattern for StreamsConfig
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-4436
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-4436
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: streams
> Reporter: Matthias J. Sax
> Priority: Minor
>
> Currently, {{StreamsConfig}} parameters must be set "manually" as key value
> pairs. This has multiple disadvantages from a user point of view:
> - mandatory arguments could be missing
> - data types might be wrong
> - producer/consumer config parameters could conflict as they might have the
> same name (user needs to know to prefix them to avoid conflict)
> Those problems have different impact: either a runtime exception is thrown if
> the problem is detected (e.g. missing parameter or wrong type) or the
> application is just not configured correctly (producer/consumer has wrong
> config).
> A builder pattern would avoid those problems by forcing the user in the first
> place to specify thing correctly (otherwise, it won't compile). For example
> something like this:
> {noformat}
> StreamsConfig config = StreamsConfig.builder()
> .setApplicationId(String appId)
> .addBootstrapServer(String host, int port)
> .addBootstrapServer(String host, int port)
> .addZookeeper(String host, int port)
> .addZookeeper(String host, int port)
> .setStateDirectory(File path)
> .setConsumerConfig(
> ConsumerConfig.builder()
> .setAutoOffsetReset(...)
> .build()
> )
> .build();
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
