[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16635820#comment-16635820
]
John Roesler commented on KAFKA-7393:
-------------------------------------
Note that for suppression in particular, the behavior is solely driven by
config, so if we had a way to serialize the configuration to a string, we could
uniquely identify a suppression node by its parent + its config. The downside
is that if you change the suppression config, you'd need an application reset.
Another alternative is to allow naming the suppression operator via
Suppressed#withName like Grouped and Materialized.
> Consider making suppression node names independent of topologically numbered
> names.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-7393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-7393
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: streams
> Reporter: John Roesler
> Priority: Major
>
> See [https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/5567#discussion_r214188984] (please
> keep the discussion on this Jira ticket).
> There is an opportunity to use a slightly different naming strategy for
> suppression nodes so that they can be moved around the topology without
> upsetting other nodes' names.
> The main downside is that it might be confusing to have a separate naming
> strategy for just this one kind of node.
> Then again, this could create important opportunities for topology-compatible
> optimizations.
>
> At a higher design/implementation cost, but a lower ongoing complexity, we
> could consider this naming approach for all node types.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
