[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12313?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17298130#comment-17298130
 ] 

Sagar Rao commented on KAFKA-12313:
-----------------------------------

Thanks [~ableegoldman] before convincing other devs, let me try to understand 
what it is first :D I will go through the KIP discussion and the ideas you 
suggested above and post my understanding here. Once we are in a good shape, 
then can look to write a KIP

> Consider deprecating the default.windowed.serde.inner.class configs
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: KAFKA-12313
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-12313
>             Project: Kafka
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: streams
>            Reporter: A. Sophie Blee-Goldman
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: needs-kip
>             Fix For: 3.0.0
>
>
> During the discussion of KIP-659 we discussed whether it made sense to have a 
> "default" class for the serdes of windowed inner classes across Streams. 
> Using these configs instead of specifying an actual Serde object can lead to 
> subtle bugs, since the WindowedDeserializer requires a windowSize in addition 
> to the inner class. If the default constructor is invoked, as it will be when 
> falling back on the config, this windowSize defaults to MAX_VALUE. 
> If the downstream program doesn't care about the window end time in the 
> output, then this can go unnoticed and technically there is no problem. But 
> if anything does depend on the end time, or the user just wants to manually 
> read the output for testing purposes, then the MAX_VALUE will result in a 
> garbage timestamp.
> We should consider whether the convenience of specifying a config instead of 
> instantiating a Serde in each operator is really worth the risk of a user 
> accidentally failing to specify a windowSize



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to