On 2021/09/24 14:09:14, PengHui Li <peng...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply,
>
> If a batch has 10 messages, but users only want to filter out parts of them
> such as 3 messages, only 7 messages should be processed at the consumer
> side.
> So if the proposal is for the entry filter, I think we should have the
> EntryFitler interface, not MessageFilter?
>
> Actually, I also have some doubts about the entry filter, not sure if it
> can be used in the real world. Or we should disable the batch when using
> the filter or deserialize
> the single message metadata to decide if the consumer should skip this
> message, looks both of them will bring greater overhead to the broker.
>
> But I am not against the pluggable filter, not all users consider the
> performance first, If they are more think about it at a functional
> perspective, the pluggable filter will help them.
> We should clarify it in the proposal, let users know how to make trade-offs.
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
Hello penghui,
I agree with your concerns. At this stage, we can only do Entry-level
filtering. If the Message in the Entry is forced to be filtered on the Broker
side, there will be problems in the subsequent consumer ack.
Therefore, if we want to use this filter, we must set enableBatching=false,
which is the same as delayed messages.
I will explain this point in the comments of the interface
Thanks,
Lin Lin
