[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-19404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18006691#comment-18006691
]
Ksolves India Limited commented on KAFKA-19404:
-----------------------------------------------
Hi [~mimaison]
According to the discussion, the updated documentation must be:-
{noformat}
The list should consist of top-level directories whose immediate subdirectories
(level 1) include any combination of:
a) directories containing jars with plugins and their dependencies
b) uber-jars with plugins and their dependencies
c) directories containing the package directory structure of classes of plugins
and their dependencies
Kafka Connect will recursively scan nested subdirectories, but classloader
isolation is applied only at the first level of subdirectories under each
directory listed in plugin.path.
Therefore, for best results and plugin isolation, place each plugin (and its
dependencies) in its own dedicated level-1 directory.
{noformat}
> Connect's plugin.path documentation does not match behavior
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: KAFKA-19404
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-19404
> Project: Kafka
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: connect
> Reporter: Mickael Maison
> Priority: Major
>
> The doc currently states:
> {quote}The list should consist of top level directories that include any
> combination of:
> a) directories immediately containing jars with plugins and their dependencies
> b) uber-jars with plugins and their dependencies
> c) directories immediately containing the package directory structure of
> classes of plugins and their dependencies
> {quote}
> In practice plugins are found even if they are in nested directories. For
> example we can set {{plugin.path}} to {{/var/plugins}} and it will find all
> these plugins:
> {noformat}
> /var/plugins
> └── nested1
> └── nested2
> ├── plugin1
> │ └── plugin1.jar
> ├── plugin2
> │ └── plugin2.jar
> ├── plugin3
> └── plugin3.jar
> {noformat}
> I think we should adjust the documentation to match the current behavior
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
