Re: [VOTE] PIP-337: SSL Factory Plugin to customize SSL Context and SSL Engine generation

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Best,
Hang

Chris Bono  于2024年7月3日周三 00:29写道：
>
> +1
>
> On 2024/06/28 20:51:39 Apurva Telang wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I would like to start the voting thread for PIP-337: SSL Factory Plugin to
> > customize SSL Context and SSL Engine generation
> >
> > PIP link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22016
> > Discuss Thread:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/v4xh3fqy2t62xdk37b2ghvkrvvnqrx80
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Apurva Telang.
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-355: Enhancing Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

Close the vote with  4 bindings and 2 non-bindings.

4 bindings:
- Yubiao Feng
- Haiting Jiang
- Penghui Li
- Jiwei Guo


2 non-bindings:
- Jiuming Tao
- Dragos Misca

Thank you all for voting for this PIP.

Best,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2024年6月11日周二 09:04写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 8:35 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 1, 2024 at 5:05 AM Dragos Misca
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 non-binding
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Dragos
> > >
> > > > On May 30, 2024, at 5:47 PM, Hang Chen  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi, all
> > > >
> > > > I would like to start the voting thread for PIP-355: Enhancing
> > > > Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar
> > > >
> > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22778
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Hang
> > >
> > >
> >

[VOTE] PIP-355: Enhancing Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

Hi, all

I would like to start the voting thread for PIP-355: Enhancing
Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22778

Thanks
Hang

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-355: Enhancing Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

If there are no objections, I will start the vote.

Thanks,
Hang

Hang Chen  于2024年5月25日周六 09:11写道：
>
> Hi guys,
>  I pushed a new proposal to enhance the broker-level metric.
> Please help take a look, thanks.
>
> PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22778
>
> Thanks,
> Hang

[DISCUSS] PIP-355: Enhancing Broker-Level Metrics for Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 I pushed a new proposal to enhance the broker-level metric.
Please help take a look, thanks.

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22778

Thanks,
Hang

Re: [VOTE] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

Close the vote with  5 bindings and 1 non-bindings.

5 bindings:
- Yubiao Feng
- Penghui Li
- Jiwei Guo
- Enrico
- Zike Yang

1 non-bindings:
- Jiuming Tao

Thank you all for voting for this PIP.

Best,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2024年5月13日周一 08:25写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:45 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:27 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > Il giorno mer 8 mag 2024 alle ore 12:51 Zike Yang  ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zike Yang
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 6:22 PM Yubiao Feng
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Yubiao Feng
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:27 AM Hang Chen 
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > >  I want to start voting for PIP-348.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650
> > > > > > PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22652
> > > > > >
> > > > > > DISCUSSION Thread:
> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/2ndomp8v4wkcykzthhlyjqfmswor88kv
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Hang
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-350: Allow to disable the managedLedgerOffloadDeletionLagInMillis

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

太上玄元道君  于2024年5月13日周一 11:30写道：
>
> +1 nonbinding
>
> Thanks,
> Tao Jiuming
>
> Yong Zhang  于2024年5月13日周一 10:57写道：
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to start voting thread for PIP-350.
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22688
> >
> > The implementation PR is:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22689
> >
> > Discuss thread:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/7tlpkcm2933ddg95kgrb42943r4gq3v9
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yong
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-350: Allow to disable the managedLedgerOffloadDeletionLagInMillis

[Hang Chen]

+1

Best,
Hang

太上玄元道君  于2024年5月10日周五 12:13写道：
>
> looks good
>
> Yong Zhang  于2024年5月10日周五 11:31写道：
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I pushed a new proposal to allow to use -1 to disable
> > the managedLedgerOffloadDeletionLagInMillis to not delete the data from
> > bookkeeper.
> >
> > Please take a look and share your thoughts. Thanks!
> >
> > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22688
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Yong
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

Close the vote with  3 bindings and 2 non-bindings.

3 bindings:
- Yubiao Feng
- Penghui Li
- Jiwei Guo

2 non-bindings:
- Jiuming Tao
- Zixuan Liu

Thank you all for voting for this PIP.

Best,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2024年5月9日周四 17:55写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 8:45 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 6:58 PM Zixuan Liu  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Zixuan
> > >
> > > Yubiao Feng  于2024年5月8日周三 18:22写道：
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Yubiao Feng
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:25 AM Hang Chen  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >  I want to start voting for PIP-349.
> > > > >
> > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651
> > > > > PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22614
> > > > >
> > > > > DISCUSSION Thread:
> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/xgcworz4j8rjlqwr476s7sqn9do43f1t
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hang
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

[VOTE] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 I want to start voting for PIP-348.

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650
PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22652

DISCUSSION Thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/2ndomp8v4wkcykzthhlyjqfmswor88kv

Thanks,
Hang

[VOTE] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 I want to start voting for PIP-349.

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651
PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22614

DISCUSSION Thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/xgcworz4j8rjlqwr476s7sqn9do43f1t

Thanks,
Hang

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 If there are no objections, I will send out the vote.

Best,
Hang

Hang Chen  于2024年5月6日周一 22:23写道：
>
> >I see, but when a broker loads a bundle with many topics, you trigger
> immediately offloading for them, even if they don't have much traffic.
> This is kind of a "bad surprise" when you update a cluster to the newer
> version and you don't expect load to spike unexpectedly.
> My concerns is only about the upgrade path for users coming from older
> versions
>
> I see. That makes sense. Let me add a flag to control this feature.
>
> Thanks,
> Hang
>
> Enrico Olivelli  于2024年5月6日周一 15:21写道：
> >
> > Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 04:15 Hang Chen  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > Hi Enrico,
> > > I agree with Jiuming, we do not need a flag to control this
> > > behavior. We will call `maybeOffloadInBackground` method in the
> > > managedledger init stage. This method only checks the offload policies
> > > to decide if we need to trigger offload. If the offload conditions are
> > > met, use the scheduled executor to trigger offload. The whole check
> > > process has no blocking calls and won't impact the managedledger init.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/eee3694f00e269eef0f75d791521d0d35d8ff411/managed-ledger/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/mledger/impl/ManagedLedgerImpl.java#L2475-L2489
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I see, but when a broker loads a bundle with many topics, you trigger
> > immediately offloading for them, even if they don't have much traffic.
> > This is kind of a "bad surprise" when you update a cluster to the newer
> > version and you don't expect load to spike unexpectedly.
> > My concerns is only about the upgrade path for users coming from older
> > versions
> >
> > Maybe it is not a big deal ?
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Hang
> > >
> > > 太上玄元道君  于2024年5月6日周一 00:31写道：
> > > >
> > > > hi Enrico,
> > > >
> > > > I still think it doesn't matter
> > > >
> > > > 1. Offload a topic or not, configured by
> > > >
> > > `managedLedgerOffloadAutoTriggerSizeThresholdBytes`/`managedLedgerOffloadThresholdInSeconds`,
> > > > even though we may trigger a bunch of stuff, it's expected behavior
> > > >
> > > > 2. After triggered to offload a topic, the offload task will be added to
> > > an
> > > > Executor, currently, we have 2 threads to execute offload with sync 
> > > > mode,
> > > > so, even though there are thousands of topics, only 2 tasks can be
> > > executed
> > > > at the same time, other tasks wait.
> > > >
> > > > 3. If you are worrying about system overwhelmed, there is a PR to
> > > introduce
> > > > offload throttling(https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22385),
> > > > it is for the purpose of protect the broker, it has been pending in
> > > review
> > > > for a lng time, I'm very appreciate it that if you can help review
> > > >
> > > > 4. There are t many flags in pulsar(~500),  I think we should be
> > > > cautious when introducing new FLAGs
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Tao Jiuming
> > > >
> > > > Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日13:44写道：
> > > >
> > > > > daojun,
> > > > >
> > > > > Il giorno sab 4 mag 2024 alle ore 22:06 太上玄元道君  ha
> > > > > scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > > it doesn't matter, we don't need to wait until offload finished when
> > > > > > loading topic, since offloading may take a long time.
> > > > > > it just trigger offloading, and we don't need to handle the result.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We don't have to wait for the results, but we still trigger a bunch of
> > > > > stuff and if the broker has thousand of topics, there may be an herd
> > > effect
> > > > > as this is a behavior change, I think it is safest to have a flag to
> > > > > disable this new behavior,
> > > > > otherwise upgrading an existing big cluster may lead to unexpected
> > > results,
> > > > > like overwhelmed systems
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日02:41写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Overall I think it is a good idea.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What about adding a flag to enable this behavior?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In case there are problems with the offloader the topic won't be
> > > able
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > load.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Enrico
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Il Sab 4 Mag 2024, 17:12 Hang Chen  ha
> > > scritto:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > > >  I pushed a new proposal to improve the tiered storage
> > > offload
> > > > > > > > efficiency. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Hang
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 If there are no objections, I will send out the vote.

Best,
Hang

Hang Chen  于2024年5月7日周二 11:17写道：
>
> >It seems that we only need to keep `additionalSystemCursorNames`.
>
> Yes, we just use the `additionalSystemCursorNames`
>
> Best,
> Hang
>
> Zixuan Liu  于2024年5月6日周一 23:52写道：
> >
> > It seems that we only need to keep `additionalSystemCursorNames`.
> >
> > `systemCursorNames` is unnecessary, which should be built-in and immutable.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zixuan
> >
> > Hang Chen  于2024年5月6日周一 22:22写道：
> >
> > > >We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be 
> > > >always
> > > handled automatically
> > >
> > > I changed the configuration name to `additionalSystemCursorNames`. I
> > > think the user should be defined as a Pulsar administrator. For
> > > cursors that need to be ignored by TTL should be owned by Pulsar
> > > internal service or Pulsar plugins owned by Pulsar administrators. For
> > > application users, they should not touch this part.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Hang
> > >
> > > Enrico Olivelli  于2024年5月6日周一 15:17写道：
> > > >
> > > > Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 09:07 PengHui Li 
> > > ha
> > > > scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > For the backlog quota check, I think we also need the same capacity.
> > > > >
> > > > > For configurable. I think the reason is users can have their plugins
> > > > > running
> > > > > with the broker which relies on the Pulsar topic. They don't want the
> > > > > application to
> > > > > change the TTL or backlog policies for some subscription/cursor. But
> > > now,
> > > > > if user set
> > > > > the TTL or backlog policy for a namespace, all the subscriptions will
> > > be
> > > > > affected.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I see.
> > > > We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be
> > > always
> > > > handled automatically
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Penghui
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 2:51 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Overall I support this idea, but the name 'systemCursorsNames' is 
> > > > > > not
> > > > > good
> > > > > > and we should not make it configurable.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First, we have to make a call to the TTL thing, otherwise we will
> > > end up
> > > > > in
> > > > > > using that for other stuff, and not only TTL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Second, we shouldn't make this configurable. Those cursors depend on
> > > the
> > > > > > version of Pulsar and users who upgrade from previous versions won't
> > > > > update
> > > > > > the configuration and this will lead to problems. And we cannot ask
> > > users
> > > > > > to update the configuration when updating
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Enrico
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Il Lun 6 Mag 2024, 08:02 Lari Hotari  ha
> > > scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > LGTM, very useful. Thanks for driving this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Lari
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 2024/05/04 16:01:41 Hang Chen wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > > > I proposed a new proposal to improve the TTL impact on 
> > > > > > > > system
> > > > > > > > cursors. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Hang
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

>It seems that we only need to keep `additionalSystemCursorNames`.

Yes, we just use the `additionalSystemCursorNames`

Best,
Hang

Zixuan Liu  于2024年5月6日周一 23:52写道：
>
> It seems that we only need to keep `additionalSystemCursorNames`.
>
> `systemCursorNames` is unnecessary, which should be built-in and immutable.
>
> Thanks,
> Zixuan
>
> Hang Chen  于2024年5月6日周一 22:22写道：
>
> > >We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be always
> > handled automatically
> >
> > I changed the configuration name to `additionalSystemCursorNames`. I
> > think the user should be defined as a Pulsar administrator. For
> > cursors that need to be ignored by TTL should be owned by Pulsar
> > internal service or Pulsar plugins owned by Pulsar administrators. For
> > application users, they should not touch this part.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hang
> >
> > Enrico Olivelli  于2024年5月6日周一 15:17写道：
> > >
> > > Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 09:07 PengHui Li 
> > ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > For the backlog quota check, I think we also need the same capacity.
> > > >
> > > > For configurable. I think the reason is users can have their plugins
> > > > running
> > > > with the broker which relies on the Pulsar topic. They don't want the
> > > > application to
> > > > change the TTL or backlog policies for some subscription/cursor. But
> > now,
> > > > if user set
> > > > the TTL or backlog policy for a namespace, all the subscriptions will
> > be
> > > > affected.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I see.
> > > We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be
> > always
> > > handled automatically
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Penghui
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 2:51 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Overall I support this idea, but the name 'systemCursorsNames' is not
> > > > good
> > > > > and we should not make it configurable.
> > > > >
> > > > > First, we have to make a call to the TTL thing, otherwise we will
> > end up
> > > > in
> > > > > using that for other stuff, and not only TTL.
> > > > >
> > > > > Second, we shouldn't make this configurable. Those cursors depend on
> > the
> > > > > version of Pulsar and users who upgrade from previous versions won't
> > > > update
> > > > > the configuration and this will lead to problems. And we cannot ask
> > users
> > > > > to update the configuration when updating
> > > > >
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > > Il Lun 6 Mag 2024, 08:02 Lari Hotari  ha
> > scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > > LGTM, very useful. Thanks for driving this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Lari
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2024/05/04 16:01:41 Hang Chen wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > > I proposed a new proposal to improve the TTL impact on system
> > > > > > > cursors. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Hang
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

>I see, but when a broker loads a bundle with many topics, you trigger
immediately offloading for them, even if they don't have much traffic.
This is kind of a "bad surprise" when you update a cluster to the newer
version and you don't expect load to spike unexpectedly.
My concerns is only about the upgrade path for users coming from older
versions

I see. That makes sense. Let me add a flag to control this feature.

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2024年5月6日周一 15:21写道：
>
> Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 04:15 Hang Chen  ha
> scritto:
>
> > Hi Enrico,
> > I agree with Jiuming, we do not need a flag to control this
> > behavior. We will call `maybeOffloadInBackground` method in the
> > managedledger init stage. This method only checks the offload policies
> > to decide if we need to trigger offload. If the offload conditions are
> > met, use the scheduled executor to trigger offload. The whole check
> > process has no blocking calls and won't impact the managedledger init.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/eee3694f00e269eef0f75d791521d0d35d8ff411/managed-ledger/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/mledger/impl/ManagedLedgerImpl.java#L2475-L2489
> >
> >
>
> I see, but when a broker loads a bundle with many topics, you trigger
> immediately offloading for them, even if they don't have much traffic.
> This is kind of a "bad surprise" when you update a cluster to the newer
> version and you don't expect load to spike unexpectedly.
> My concerns is only about the upgrade path for users coming from older
> versions
>
> Maybe it is not a big deal ?
>
> Enrico
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hang
> >
> > 太上玄元道君  于2024年5月6日周一 00:31写道：
> > >
> > > hi Enrico,
> > >
> > > I still think it doesn't matter
> > >
> > > 1. Offload a topic or not, configured by
> > >
> > `managedLedgerOffloadAutoTriggerSizeThresholdBytes`/`managedLedgerOffloadThresholdInSeconds`,
> > > even though we may trigger a bunch of stuff, it's expected behavior
> > >
> > > 2. After triggered to offload a topic, the offload task will be added to
> > an
> > > Executor, currently, we have 2 threads to execute offload with sync mode,
> > > so, even though there are thousands of topics, only 2 tasks can be
> > executed
> > > at the same time, other tasks wait.
> > >
> > > 3. If you are worrying about system overwhelmed, there is a PR to
> > introduce
> > > offload throttling(https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22385),
> > > it is for the purpose of protect the broker, it has been pending in
> > review
> > > for a lng time, I'm very appreciate it that if you can help review
> > >
> > > 4. There are t many flags in pulsar(~500),  I think we should be
> > > cautious when introducing new FLAGs
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Tao Jiuming
> > >
> > > Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日13:44写道：
> > >
> > > > daojun,
> > > >
> > > > Il giorno sab 4 mag 2024 alle ore 22:06 太上玄元道君  ha
> > > > scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > it doesn't matter, we don't need to wait until offload finished when
> > > > > loading topic, since offloading may take a long time.
> > > > > it just trigger offloading, and we don't need to handle the result.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > We don't have to wait for the results, but we still trigger a bunch of
> > > > stuff and if the broker has thousand of topics, there may be an herd
> > effect
> > > > as this is a behavior change, I think it is safest to have a flag to
> > > > disable this new behavior,
> > > > otherwise upgrading an existing big cluster may lead to unexpected
> > results,
> > > > like overwhelmed systems
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日02:41写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > Overall I think it is a good idea.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What about adding a flag to enable this behavior?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In case there are problems with the offloader the topic won't be
> > able
> > > > to
> > > > > > load.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Enrico
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Il Sab 4 Mag 2024, 17:12 Hang Chen  ha
> > scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > > >  I pushed a new proposal to improve the tiered storage
> > offload
> > > > > > > efficiency. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Hang
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

>We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be always
handled automatically

I changed the configuration name to `additionalSystemCursorNames`. I
think the user should be defined as a Pulsar administrator. For
cursors that need to be ignored by TTL should be owned by Pulsar
internal service or Pulsar plugins owned by Pulsar administrators. For
application users, they should not touch this part.

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2024年5月6日周一 15:17写道：
>
> Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 09:07 PengHui Li  ha
> scritto:
>
> > For the backlog quota check, I think we also need the same capacity.
> >
> > For configurable. I think the reason is users can have their plugins
> > running
> > with the broker which relies on the Pulsar topic. They don't want the
> > application to
> > change the TTL or backlog policies for some subscription/cursor. But now,
> > if user set
> > the TTL or backlog policy for a namespace, all the subscriptions will be
> > affected.
> >
>
> I see.
> We can make this "configurable", but the well known names should be always
> handled automatically
>
> Enrico
>
>
> >
> > Penghui
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 2:51 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Overall I support this idea, but the name 'systemCursorsNames' is not
> > good
> > > and we should not make it configurable.
> > >
> > > First, we have to make a call to the TTL thing, otherwise we will end up
> > in
> > > using that for other stuff, and not only TTL.
> > >
> > > Second, we shouldn't make this configurable. Those cursors depend on the
> > > version of Pulsar and users who upgrade from previous versions won't
> > update
> > > the configuration and this will lead to problems. And we cannot ask users
> > > to update the configuration when updating
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > > Il Lun 6 Mag 2024, 08:02 Lari Hotari  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > LGTM, very useful. Thanks for driving this.
> > > >
> > > > -Lari
> > > >
> > > > On 2024/05/04 16:01:41 Hang Chen wrote:
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > > I proposed a new proposal to improve the TTL impact on system
> > > > > cursors. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hang
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

Hi Enrico,
I agree with Jiuming, we do not need a flag to control this
behavior. We will call `maybeOffloadInBackground` method in the
managedledger init stage. This method only checks the offload policies
to decide if we need to trigger offload. If the offload conditions are
met, use the scheduled executor to trigger offload. The whole check
process has no blocking calls and won't impact the managedledger init.
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/eee3694f00e269eef0f75d791521d0d35d8ff411/managed-ledger/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/mledger/impl/ManagedLedgerImpl.java#L2475-L2489


Thanks,
Hang

太上玄元道君  于2024年5月6日周一 00:31写道：
>
> hi Enrico,
>
> I still think it doesn't matter
>
> 1. Offload a topic or not, configured by
> `managedLedgerOffloadAutoTriggerSizeThresholdBytes`/`managedLedgerOffloadThresholdInSeconds`,
> even though we may trigger a bunch of stuff, it's expected behavior
>
> 2. After triggered to offload a topic, the offload task will be added to an
> Executor, currently, we have 2 threads to execute offload with sync mode,
> so, even though there are thousands of topics, only 2 tasks can be executed
> at the same time, other tasks wait.
>
> 3. If you are worrying about system overwhelmed, there is a PR to introduce
> offload throttling(https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22385),
> it is for the purpose of protect the broker, it has been pending in review
> for a lng time, I'm very appreciate it that if you can help review
>
> 4. There are t many flags in pulsar(~500),  I think we should be
> cautious when introducing new FLAGs
>
> Thanks,
> Tao Jiuming
>
> Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日13:44写道：
>
> > daojun,
> >
> > Il giorno sab 4 mag 2024 alle ore 22:06 太上玄元道君  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > it doesn't matter, we don't need to wait until offload finished when
> > > loading topic, since offloading may take a long time.
> > > it just trigger offloading, and we don't need to handle the result.
> > >
> >
> > We don't have to wait for the results, but we still trigger a bunch of
> > stuff and if the broker has thousand of topics, there may be an herd effect
> > as this is a behavior change, I think it is safest to have a flag to
> > disable this new behavior,
> > otherwise upgrading an existing big cluster may lead to unexpected results,
> > like overwhelmed systems
> >
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Enrico Olivelli 于2024年5月5日 周日02:41写道：
> > >
> > > > Overall I think it is a good idea.
> > > >
> > > > What about adding a flag to enable this behavior?
> > > >
> > > > In case there are problems with the offloader the topic won't be able
> > to
> > > > load.
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > > Il Sab 4 Mag 2024, 17:12 Hang Chen  ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi guys,
> > > > >  I pushed a new proposal to improve the tiered storage offload
> > > > > efficiency. Please help take a look, thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hang
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

[DISCUSS] PIP-349: Add systemCursorNames ignore list for TTL check

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
I proposed a new proposal to improve the TTL impact on system
cursors. Please help take a look, thanks.

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22651

Thanks,
Hang

[DISCUSS] PIP-348: Trigger offload on topic load stage

[Hang Chen]

Hi guys,
 I pushed a new proposal to improve the tiered storage offload
efficiency. Please help take a look, thanks.

PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22650

Thanks,
Hang

Re: [VOTE] PIP-339: Introducing the --log-topic Option for Pulsar Sinks and Sources

[Hang Chen]

+1(binding)

Regards,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2024年2月27日周二 15:54写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 10:18 AM Zike Yang  wrote:
>
> > +1 (no-binding)
> >
> > BR,
> > Zike Yang
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:56 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Penghui
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 5:44 PM Pengcheng Jiang
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi, community
> > > >
> > > > I'm starting the vote for PIP-339: Introducing the --log-topic Option
> > for
> > > > Pulsar Sinks and Sources
> > > > PIP link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22071
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Pengcheng Jiang
> > > >
> >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Asaf Mesika

[Hang Chen]

Congratulations Asaf!

Best,
Hang

太上玄元道君  于2024年2月21日周三 13:07写道：
>
> congrats!
>
> Lari Hotari 于2024年2月21日 周三00:50写道：
>
> > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited
> > Asaf Mesika https://github.com/asafm to become a committer and we
> > are pleased to announce that he has accepted.
> >
> > Welcome and Congratulations, Asaf Mesika!
> >
> > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Asaf onboard!
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Lari Hotari
> > on behalf of the Pulsar PMC
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-335: Oxia metadata support

[Hang Chen]

+1

Best,
Hang

Haiting Jiang  于2024年2月6日周二 11:22写道：
>
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting
>
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 4:40 AM Matteo Merli  wrote:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22009
> >
> > -
> >
> > # PIP-335: Support Oxia metadata store plugin
> >
> > # Motivation
> >
> > Oxia is a scalable metadata store and coordination system that can be used
> > as the core infrastructure
> > to build large scale distributed systems.
> >
> > Oxia was created with the primary goal of providing an alternative Pulsar
> > to replace ZooKeeper as the
> > long term preferred metadata store, overcoming all the current limitations
> > in terms of metadata
> > access throughput and data set size.
> >
> > # Goals
> >
> > Add a Pulsar MetadataStore plugin that uses Oxia client SDK.
> >
> > Users will be able to start a Pulsar cluster using just Oxia, without any
> > ZooKeeper involved.
> >
> > ## Not in Scope
> >
> > It's not in the scope of this proposal to change any default behavior or
> > configuration of Pulsar.
> >
> > # Detailed Design
> >
> > ## Design & Implementation Details
> >
> > Oxia semantics and client SDK were already designed with Pulsar and
> > MetadataStore plugin API in mind, so
> > there is not much integration work that needs to be done here.
> >
> > Just few notes:
> >  1. Oxia client already provides support for transparent batching of read
> > and write operations,
> > so there will be no use of the batching logic in
> > `AbstractBatchedMetadataStore`
> >  2. Oxia does not treat keys as a walkable file-system like interface, with
> > directories and files. Instead
> > all the keys are independent. Though Oxia sorting of keys is aware of
> > '/' and provides efficient key
> > range scanning operations to identify the first level children of a
> > given key
> >  3. Oxia, unlike ZooKeeper, doesn't require the parent path of a key to
> > exist. eg: we can create `/a/b/c` key
> > without `/a/b` and `/a` existing.
> > In the Pulsar integration for Oxia we're forcing to create all parent
> > keys when they are not there. This
> > is due to several places in BookKeeper access where it does not create
> > the parent keys, though it will
> > later make `getChildren()` operations on the parents.
> >
> > ## Other notes
> >
> > Unlike in the ZooKeeper implementation, the notification of events is
> > guaranteed in Oxia, because the Oxia
> > client SDK will use the transaction offset after server reconnections and
> > session restarted events. This
> > will ensure that brokers cache will always be properly invalidated. We will
> > then be able to remove the
> > current 5minutes automatic cache refresh which is in place to prevent the
> > ZooKeeper missed watch issue.
> >
> > # Links
> >
> > Oxia: https://github.com/streamnative/oxia
> > Oxia Java Client SDK: https://github.com/streamnative/oxia-java
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-335: Oxia metadata support

[Hang Chen]

+1

Best,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2024年2月1日周四 09:03写道：
>
> +1
>
> Best,
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 7:58 AM Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/22009
> >
> > ===
> >
> > # PIP-335: Supporty Oxia metadata store plugin
> >
> > # Motivation
> >
> > Oxia is a scalable metadata store and coordination system that can be used
> > as the core infrastructure
> > to build large scale distributed systems.
> >
> > Oxia was created with the primary goal of providing an alternative Pulsar
> > to replace ZooKeeper as the
> > long term preferred metadata store, overcoming all the current limitations
> > in terms of metadata
> > access throughput and data set size.
> >
> > # Goals
> >
> > Add a Pulsar MetadataStore plugin that uses Oxia client SDK.
> >
> > Users will be able to start a Pulsar cluster using just Oxia, without any
> > ZooKeeper involved.
> >
> > ## Not in Scope
> >
> > It's not in the scope of this proposal to change any default behavior or
> > configuration of Pulsar.
> >
> > # Detailed Design
> >
> > ## Design & Implementation Details
> >
> > Oxia semantics and client SDK were already designed with Pulsar and
> > MetadataStore plugin API in mind, so
> > there is not much integration work that needs to be done here.
> >
> > Just a few notes:
> >  1. Oxia client already provides support for transparent batching of read
> > and write operations,
> > so there will be no use of the batching logic in
> > `AbstractBatchedMetadataStore`
> >  2. Oxia does not treat keys as a walkable file-system like interface, with
> > directories and files. Instead
> > all the keys are independent. Though Oxia sorting of keys is aware of
> > '/' and provides efficient key
> > range scanning operations to identify the first level children of a
> > given key
> >  3. Oxia, unlike ZooKeeper, doesn't require the parent path of a key to
> > exist. eg: we can create `/a/b/c` key
> > without `/a/b` and `/a` existing.
> > In the Pulsar integration for Oxia we're forcing to create all parent
> > keys when they are not there. This
> > is due to several places in BookKeeper access where it does not create
> > the parent keys, though it will
> > later make `getChildren()` operations on the parents.
> >
> > ## Other notes
> >
> > Unlike in the ZooKeeper implementation, the notification of events is
> > guaranteed in Oxia, because the Oxia
> > client SDK will use the transaction offset after server reconnections and
> > session restarted events. This
> > will ensure that brokers cache will always be properly invalidated. We will
> > then be able to remove the
> > current 5minutes automatic cache refresh which is in place to prevent the
> > ZooKeeper missed watch issue.
> >
> > # Links
> >
> > Oxia: https://github.com/streamnative/oxia
> > Oxia Java Client SDK: https://github.com/streamnative/oxia-java
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-317: Add `bookkeeperDeleted` field to show whether a ledger is deleted from the Bookie while using tiered storage

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Regards,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年11月27日周一 09:54写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> And please also update the `# Backward & Forward Compatibility` section
> as Enrico mentioned.
>
> Regards,
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 12:47 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > It will be important to add tests about rolling back to the previous
> > version of Pulsar and/or clusters with mixed versions of the brokers
> > (during rolling upgrades).
> > The old version should not complain about the new field added.
> > Maybe you can add a note in the PIP
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il Mer 15 Nov 2023, 00:35 Shen Liu  ha scritto:
> >
> > > Hi community,
> > >
> > > This thread is to start a vote for PIP-317: Add `bookkeeperDeleted` field
> > > to show whether a ledger is deleted from the Bookie while using tiered
> > > storage.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21521
> > >
> > > Discussion thread:
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/9kjgg06oj384myxqls73dwn840thtrrc
> > >
> > > Releted PR/issue: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20833
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Shen Liu
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Consistent code style (esp. ws/indent) and autotools

[Hang Chen]

>While I can agree that a consistent style can help I don’t agree that it is 
>necessary. If the compiler understands the code then IMO we are good.

I agree with Dave's idea. My concern is how much value this change
will bring to Pulsar. What's more, it will bring other burdens, such
as PR review, PR cherry-pick, git blames. The main goal of Pulsar is
to improve the reliability.

-1 for this change.

Best,
Hang

徐昀泽  于2023年9月4日周一 19:24写道：
>
> Well, I’m just back to this thread.
>
> Now I’m +1 to this extremely huge change, but to be more friendly to 
> developers,
> we should document the workarounds for the git blame issue. And we should 
> apply
> the spotless tool to every active branches.
>
> > On Sep 3, 2023, at 19:43, Asaf Mesika  wrote:
> >
> > I couldn't stress how much I oppose the sentence "If the compiler
> > understands the code then IMO we are good."
> >
> > Sinan is right: This project needs to take calculated risks in order to
> > move forward to be better.
> > Yes I agree prioritizing is super important, since Pulsar has *so many*
> > fronts to be better at.
> >
> > We need more people on this thread, to get a wide angle on this IMO.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 2, 2023 at 7:27 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >
> >> While I can agree that a consistent style can help I don’t agree that it
> >> is necessary. If the compiler understands the code then IMO we are good.
> >>
> >> I am a bit of a dinosaur since I have keypunched code on cards in my
> >> career. I’ve played with writing interpreters and specialized languages.
> >>
> >> But I’m -0 and if the project prefers strict code style then that is fine
> >> too!
> >>
> >> If anyone agrees with me know that part of consensus building is to
> >> provide opinions and accept divergent results.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Dave
> >>
> >> PS. If tisun wants to put on their superhero cape and convert the code
> >> base then let’s acknowledge that AND let’s consider all of the PRs that are
> >> now effectively closed.
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Sep 1, 2023, at 8:57 PM, SiNan Liu  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Consistent code style is crucial for a large project. In order to make
> >>> Pulsar better, I believe we shouldn't be afraid of "risks".
> >>> By introducing Spotless, we can permanently resolve the issue of
> >>> inconsistent code style and ensure that all contributors adhere to this
> >>> rule moving forward.
> >>> If we don't make these changes now, we might have to deal with changes in
> >>> over 3000 files today and potentially over 5000 files tomorrow.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> sinan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dave Fisher  于2023年9月1日周五 12:19写道：
> >>>
>  -0. I think it will introduce too much change. We have classes that are
>  quite large and having to fix code style after making a small correction
>  seems like a waste of volunteer energy.
> 
>  Best,
>  Dave
> 
>  Sent from my iPhone
> 
> >> On Aug 31, 2023, at 9:05 PM, Zixuan Liu  wrote:
> >
> > This idea looks good to me, but we need to format all codebase to
> > avoid conflicts during cherry picking.
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Asaf Mesika  于2023年8月31日周四 20:39写道：
> >>
> >> Opentelemetry-java employs both spotless for coding style
> >> You run "./gradlew spotlessCheck" and it shows the problems.
> >> You run "./gradlew spotlessApply" to automatically fix it.
> >>
> >> It also uses errorprone to detect bugs.
> >>
> >> I wonder if we can run it only in GitHub PRs, so we can instruct it to
>  run
> >> only on files you have changed / added. This is we "throttle" the
> >> style
> >> through files touched.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 8:31 PM tison  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> These have been discussed that -
> >>>
> >>> 1.  Cherrypick: we will reformat for all maintained branches.
> >>> 2. Commit noise: metadata to filter out during blame.
> >>> 3. PR rebased: invincible, while we don't have a large backlog or
>  active
> >>> large pending PR.
> >>>
> >>> But if our critical mass agree this is not a good tradeoff, there is
> >> no
> >>> issue to "resolve".
> >>>
> >>> Enrico Olivelli 于2023年8月16日 周三00:50写道：
> >>>
>  Tison,
> 
>  Il Mar 15 Ago 2023, 16:56 tison  ha scritto:
> 
> > A demostration for change set -
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20974
> 
> 
> 
>  While I think it is great to start with Spotless for little projects
>  or
>  when you start from scratch,
>  appling a patch that changes 3.000+ files will make it very hard to
> >>> rebase
>  all the pending PRs and also to cherry pick changes to older
> >> branches
> >>> that
>  we support.
> 
>  I think that this is not a good option for Pulsar at this stage.
> 
>  Maybe if we had a configuration that 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-264: Enhanced OTel-based metric system

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks for your great proposal!

Best,
Hang

Asaf Mesika  于2023年8月28日周一 22:55写道：
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm very happy to start the vote process for PIP-264.
>
> PIP is located at https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21080.
>
> The PIP was at the discussion stage from April 27th (~4 months). I want to
> express my sincere gratitude to Matteo, Hang and Larry for taking the time
> to read through the *entire* PIP, validate the solution, and help me make
> the PIP better. Also thank Penghui for bearing me with so many questions
> and helping through the construction and validation of the solution.
>
> I believe this PIP to be a cornerstone for the successful adoption of
> Pulsar and the welfare of the  existing user base.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Asaf

Re: [VOTE] PIP 296: Introduce the `getLastMessageIds` API to Reader

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Regards,
Hang

 于2023年8月28日周一 08:59写道：
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Best,
> Mattison
> On 28 Aug 2023 at 08:53 +0800, PengHui Li , wrote:
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 8:09 PM Yubiao Feng
> >  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Yubiao Feng
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 2:53 PM Xiangying Meng 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Hi Pulsar Community,
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the vote thread for PIP 296:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21052
> > > > >
> > > > > This PIP will help to improve the flexibility of Reader usage.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Xiangying
> > > > >
> > >

Re: [DISCUSS] New label type: category/*

[Hang Chen]

+1 for adding the above three labels.

Regards,
Hang

tison  于2023年8月22日周二 00:18写道：
>
> You may update the label strategy page simultaneously -
> https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/develop-labels/
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> PengHui Li  于2023年8月21日周一 23:41写道：
>
> > I will add the labels, and if there are any objections, I will revert it
> > back.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 10:36 PM  wrote:
> >
> > > +1.
> > >
> > >
> > > Quality and performance are now the most essential parts of Apache
> > Pulsar.
> > > Adding a clear label to help manage and measure would be great.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > > On 21 Aug 2023 at 15:30 +0800, PengHui Li , wrote:
> > > > > These tags are clear. Is there any existing document for what the
> > > > labels represent? If not, we'd better create one.
> > > >
> > > > I think no, maybe we can have a page for Committers under the Community
> > > tab
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Penghui
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 2:29 PM Yubiao Feng <
> > > yubiao.f...@streamnative.io.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > > @Penghui
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It feels great, and it's really helpful for the community to sift
> > > through
> > > > > > highlighting PRs
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Yubiao
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 12:28 PM PengHui Li 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry, accidentally clicked send button :), please ignore the
> > > previous
> > > > > > > email.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion about adding a new label type
> > > category/*
> > > > > > > There are three labels are supposed to be added
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - category/functionality
> > > > > > > - category/reliability
> > > > > > > - category/performance
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It could be a good improvement to the labeling system that Pulsar
> > > has
> > > > > > > today.
> > > > > > > Now, Pulsar mainly have four label categories
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - type/* - type/bug, type/feat ...
> > > > > > > - component/* - component/authentication, component/broker ...
> > > > > > > - release/* - release/3.0.2, release/3.1.1 ...
> > > > > > > - cherry-picked/* - cherry-picked/branch-3.0,
> > > cherry-picked/branch-3.1 ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > type/* is mainly distinguish the issues and PRs are for bug
> > > reporting, bug
> > > > > > > fix,
> > > > > > > feature requests, feature support.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > component/*, you can know the issues and PRs are happened on
> > which
> > > > > > > component with the component labels, such as an issue with
> > > type/bug and
> > > > > > > component/broker means it's a bug report for the broker
> > component.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > release/* labels are indicating which version the issue/PR has
> > > been fixed
> > > > > > > or will be fixed depending on if the version is released or not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > cherry-picked/* labels are more mainly for Pulsar committers to
> > > ensure the
> > > > > > > fixes are cherry-picked to the release branches. The label only
> > > can be
> > > > > > > added
> > > > > > > after the cherry-picking is done for a corresponding branch. So
> > > that the
> > > > > > > release
> > > > > > > manager can have a list of PRs that should to be cherry-picked.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, In addition to being able to identify which component that
> > > the issue,
> > > > > > > PR
> > > > > > > is fixed or enhanced. The category labels will provide more
> > > information
> > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > the fix or enhancement for functionality, reliability, or
> > > performance. For
> > > > > > > most
> > > > > > > cases, the category labels only work with type/bug and
> > > type/enhancement.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - category/functionality,  some functions are not working, such
> > as
> > > getting
> > > > > > > errors.
> > > > > > > - category/reliability, the function is working for most cases.
> > It
> > > does not
> > > > > > > work
> > > > > > >properly in certain specific
> > > environments or
> > > > > > > failures. e.g.
> > > > > > >data lost, consumption stuck ...
> > > > > > > - category/performance, performance issues fix or improvements.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Penghui
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 12:22 PM PengHui Li 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion about adding a new label
> > type
> > > > > > > category/*
> > > > > > > > There are three labels are supposed to be added
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - category/functionality
> > > > > > > > - category/reliability
> > > > > > > > - category/performance
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It could be a good improvement to the labeling system that
> > > Pulsar has

Re: [VOTE] PIP-284 Replace reader with table view in the topic policy service

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2023年8月21日周一 16:24写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 1:34 PM Yunze Xu  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > The only question I have is that do we need a PIP for such a change?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 10:14 AM  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello, Guys
> > >
> > > Since there are no concerns in the discussion mail, I'd like to start
> > voting for this PIP.
> > >
> > > The PIP link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21033
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-294: Filter Low Throughput Bundles For Report

[Hang Chen]

Hi fwz,
Thanks for driving this proposal. I left some comments in the
PIP's PR, and please help take a look at it.

Regards,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年8月21日周一 16:15写道：
>
> Thanks for driving the improvement to the load balancer.
>
> I have left some comments in the PIP's PR for improving the readability of
> the proposal
> Please take a look.
>
> Regards,
> Penghui
>
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 4:28 PM fwz  wrote:
>
> > Hi Pulsar Community,
> > This is the vote thread for PIP-294:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/21011
> >
> >
> > This PIP will help reduce the pressure to zk by filtering lots of bundles
> > with low throughput/msg-rate when exporting metric to zk.
> >
> >
> > Thanks, thetumbled.

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-264: Enhanced OTel-based metric system

[Hang Chen]

Hi Asaf,
Thanks for bring up the great proposal.

After reading this proposal, I have the following questions.
1. This proposal will introduce a big break change in Pulsar,
especially in code perspective. I’m interested in how to support both
old and new implementation at the same time step by step?

>We will keep the current metric system as is, and add a new layer of metrics 
>using OpenTelemetry Java SDK. All of Pulsar’s metrics will be create also 
>using OpenTelemetry. A feature flag will allow enabling OpenTelemetry metrics 
>(init, recording and exporting). All the features and changes described here 
>will be done only in the OpenTelemetry layer, allowing to keep the old version 
>working until you’re ready to switch using the OTel (OpenTelemetry) 
>implementation. In the far future, once OTel usage has stabilized and became 
>widely adopted we’ll deprecate current metric system and eventually remove it. 
>We will also make sure there is feature flag to turn off current Prometheus 
>based metric system.

2. We introduced Group and filter logic in the metric system, and I
have the following concerns.
- We need to add protection logic or pre-validation for the group and
filter rules to avoid users mis-configured causes huge performance
impaction on Pulsar brokers

- We need to support expose all the topic-level metrics when the
Pulsar cluster just has thounds of topics

- Even though we introduced group and filter for the metrics, we still
can’t resolve large number of metrics exposed to Prometheus. Exposing
large a mount of data (100MB+) throughput HTTP endpoint in
ineffective. We can consider expose those metric data by Pulsar topic
and develop a Pulsar to Prometheus connector to write Pulsar metric
data to Prometheus in streaming mode instead of batch mode to reduce
the performace impaction

- Group and filter logic uses regular expressions extensively in
rules. Regular expression parsing and matching are CPU and time
intensive operations. We have push-down filter to reduce the generated
metrics number, but still can’t solve the regular expression matching
issues. If the user provide a complex regular expression for group and
filter rule, the metric generating thread will be the bottleneck and
will block other threads if we use synchronous call.

- Group and filter rule is a litter complex for users and we need to
provide a UI or tool to help user write the correct and effective
rules and show the new rules impaction on old rules.


Thanks,
Hang

Matteo Merli  于2023年6月15日周四 23:14写道：
>
> > Proposing a large breaking change (even if it's crucial) is the single
> fastest way to motivate your users to migrate to a different platform. I
> wish it wasn't the case, but it's the cold reality.
>
> If you read the proposal, there is no real breaking change. There will be a
> switch to choose the existing metrics or the new ones. The dashboards will
> be updated and provided.
>
> At the same time, the best sure way to motivate users to switch or not
> adopt a platform is to stick with confusing/inconsistent APIs/Metrics.
>
>
> --
> Matteo Merli
> 
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 6:10 PM Devin Bost  wrote:
>
> > > Thanks for the details, Devin. Curios - 'We' stands for which company?
> >
> > What do you mean? I was quoting Rajan when I said, "we."
> >
> >
> > Devin G. Bost
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 10:02 AM Asaf Mesika 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the details, Devin. Curios - 'We' stands for which company?
> > >
> > > Can you take a look at my previous response to see if it answers the
> > > concern you raised?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 1:49 PM Devin Bost  wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Are we proposing a change to break existing metrics compatibility
> > > > > (prometheus)? If that is the case then it's a big red flag as it will
> > > be
> > > > a
> > > > > pain for any company to upgrade Pulsar as monitoring is THE most
> > > > important
> > > > > part of the system and we don't even want to break compatibility for
> > > any
> > > > > small things to avoid interruption for users that are using Pulsar
> > > > system.
> > > > > I think it's always good to enhance a system by maintaining
> > > compatibility
> > > > > and I would be fine if we can introduce new metrics API without
> > causing
> > > > ANY
> > > > > interruption to existing metrics API. But if we can't maintain
> > > > > compatibility then it's a big red flag and not acceptable for the
> > > Pulsar
> > > > > community.
> > > >
> > > > Proposing a large breaking change (even if it's crucial) is the single
> > > > fastest way to motivate your users to migrate to a different platform.
> > I
> > > > wish it wasn't the case, but it's the cold reality.
> > > >
> > > > With that said, I'm a big proponent of Open Telemetry. I did a big
> > video
> > > a
> > > > while back that some of you may remember on the use of Open Tracing
> > > (before
> > > > it was merged into Open Telemetry). 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-293: Delete config `disableBrokerInterceptors`

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

 于2023年8月18日周五 06:33写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> Best,
> Mattison
> On 15 Aug 2023 at 16:24 +0800, guo jiwei , wrote:
> > Hi dev,
> > There is a config in ServiceConfiguration called
> > `disableBrokerInterceptors` introduced by #8157
> > , it looks to disable the
> > broker interceptor, but commented for using test only. In actual, we judge
> > whether enable the interceptor by judging whether the broker is loaded into
> > the interceptors.Then in #10489
> > , it kept the same
> > implementation.
> > But #20422  has changed the
> > behavior, it judges whether enable the interceptor by
> > `disableBrokerInterceptors` and then it caused an NPE issue mentioned in
> > #20710 .
> > This config has a little confusing, so we decide to delete it.
> >
> > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20993
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.11.2 release

[Hang Chen]

+1

Apache Pulsar 2.11.x uses BookKeeper 4.15.x, which is no release plan yet.
BookKeeper is releasing 4.14.8, which will be used Pulsar 2.9.x and 2.10.x

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年7月5日周三 07:54写道：
>
> Hi Enrico,
>
> Which BK release do we want to wait? I noticed that the BookKeeper community
> is releasing 4.14.8 and 4.16.2, but Pulsar 2.11 is using 4.15.
>
> Regards,
> Penghui
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 2:56 PM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
>
> > Jiwei,
> >
> > Il giorno lun 26 giu 2023 alle ore 08:09 guo jiwei
> >  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > Hello, community:
> > >It has been more than 2 months since the release of 2.11.1. During
> > this
> > > period, we have more than 80 fixes.
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v2.11.1...branch-2.11
> > >I suggest releasing  2.11.2. If you have no comments, I will check the
> > > existing PR that needs to cherry-pick to the 2.11 branch.
> > >If you have a PR that needs to cherry-pick, please leave a message
> > here.
> >
> >
> > Probably we want to wait for a BK release, apart from that I am +1
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Cherry-pick PR-16059 to 2.10 to prevent infinite unloading

[Hang Chen]

+1 for cherry-picking it to branch-2.10. We have a flag to control
whether to enable or disable it.

`removeMostServicingBrokersForNamespace ` is introduced by [1] to
solve the problem that when all bundles in a particular namespace
belong to 1 or few machines, customers owning that namespace will be
heavily impacted if that broker goes down. Of course, this PR caused
the infinite unloading issue and we need to fix it.

> I agree with making it false for the next major version release by default.
We'd better remove the config in the next version instead of change
the default value to `false`, which will make Pulsar's configuration
keep increasing.

Thanks,
Hang

[1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/388

PengHui Li  于2023年7月1日周六 09:38写道：
>
> +1 for cherry-pick to branch-2.10 since users don't have a workaround
> for this issue, and the change is well-understand, low risk.
>
> I agree with making it false for the next major version release by default.
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 9:26 AM Heesung Sohn
>  wrote:
>
> > Hi dev,
> >
> > I realized that `removeMostServicingBrokersForNamespace` func in the broker
> > selection logic can cause infinite unloading.
> >
> > Suppose an overloaded broker unloaded a bundle and only has the minimum
> > number of bundles(in that namespace) among brokers. In that case, the
> > selection logic (`removeMostServicingBrokersForNamespace`) will filter out
> > other brokers and always reassign the bundle to the previous broker. This
> > will cause infinite unloading(like a boomerang).
> >
> > To mitigate this issue, we need to cherry-pick this PR to disable this
> > logic by the config.
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16059
> >
> > And we probably want to disable this
> > `removeMostServicingBrokersForNamespace` logic by default.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Heesung
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-276: Add metric `pulsar_topic_load_times

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Yunze Xu  于2023年6月26日周一 19:59写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 20, 2023, at 10:53, mattisonc...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Mattison
> > On 20 Jun 2023 at 10:45 +0800, PengHui Li , wrote:
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Penghui
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:40 AM Yubiao Feng
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Voting +1 (non-binding)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Yubiao Feng
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 5:21 PM Asaf Mesika  wrote:
> >>>
> > Voting +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 12:23 PM guo jiwei  wrote:
> >
> >>> @Asaf Thanks, I have addressed the comment.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 3:55 AM Asaf Mesika 
> > wrote:
> >>>
> > -1 (non-binding)
> >
> > I'm perfectly ok with the idea; just please fix the document. It
> >>> looks
> >>> too
> > messy. Even 1 paragraph changes can look neat and clean.
> > I left notes in the draft PR you opened for the pip.
> >
> > I'll change my non-binding vote once that's done.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:07 AM guo jiwei 
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> Hi, community:
> >>> The metrics are all started with `pulsar_`, so that both users
> > and
> >>> operators can quickly find the metrics of the entire system 
> >>> through
> >>> this prefix. However, due to some other reasons, it was found that
> >>> `topic_load_times` was missing the prefix, so want to get it 
> >>> right.
> >>> In the master branch :
> >>> * `pulsar_topic_load_times`: Add this new metric which has the
> >>> same
> >>> meaning as `topic_load_times`
> >>> * `topic_load_times`: Mark this metric as deprecated and
> >>> remove
> >>> it
> > in
> >>> the next version
> >>>
> >>> PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/20518
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >>>
> >
> >>>
> >
> >>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar 3.0.1

[Hang Chen]

> Do we need to have https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3979
> in the 3.0.1 release? since it's a critical issue for BookKeeper.

Sure, I will trigger a new BookKeeper release to include [1] and [2]
as soon as possible.

[1] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3979
[2] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3983

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2023年6月13日周二 04:57写道：
>
> Il Lun 12 Giu 2023, 02:23 PengHui Li  ha scritto:
>
> > Do we need to have https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3979
> > in the 3.0.1 release? since it's a critical issue for BookKeeper.
> >
>
>
> Yes we do
>
> Enrico
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2023 at 12:07 AM Enrico Olivelli 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I have reported a few problems about ExtensibleLoadManagerImpl (PIP-192)
> > on
> > > k8s.
> > >
> > > I would lile to see the related patches merged, this way it will be
> > easier
> > > for users to test this new feature.
> > >
> > >
> > > BTW it is not a blocker.
> > >
> > > There are already enough fixes to motivate a release
> > >
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Il Sab 10 Giu 2023, 16:15 Christophe Bornet  ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 5 juin 2023 à 03:44, Zixuan Liu  a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Zixuan
> > > > >
> > > > > Hang Chen  于2023年6月5日周一 09:39写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Hang
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PengHui Li  于2023年6月5日周一 09:34写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for driving the release.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Penghui
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 7:38 PM Zike Yang 
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I would like to propose releasing the Pulsar 3.0.1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Currently, there are 95 new commits in branch-3.0:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v3.0.0...branch-3.0
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And we have found that there is an issue with the
> > > pulsar-all:3.0.0
> > > > > > > > image:
> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/phcrm6czhyo7po6qncojk46hkytswblj
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We need to cut a new release. Please let me know if you have
> > any
> > > > > > > > important fixes that need to be included in Pulsar 3.0.1.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Zike Yang
> > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar 3.0.1

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年6月5日周一 09:34写道：
>
> +1
>
> Thanks for driving the release.
>
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 7:38 PM Zike Yang  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I would like to propose releasing the Pulsar 3.0.1.
> >
> > Currently, there are 95 new commits in branch-3.0:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v3.0.0...branch-3.0
> >
> > And we have found that there is an issue with the pulsar-all:3.0.0
> > image: https://lists.apache.org/thread/phcrm6czhyo7po6qncojk46hkytswblj
> >
> > We need to cut a new release. Please let me know if you have any
> > important fixes that need to be included in Pulsar 3.0.1.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zike Yang
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-265: PR-based system for managing and reviewing PIPs

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

It will be helpful for PR review.

Best,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年5月15日周一 10:09写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 6:52 PM Asaf Mesika  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm starting the vote process for PIP-265.
> >
> > Link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/20207
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Asaf
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-265: PR-based system for managing and reviewing PIPs

[Hang Chen]

Thanks for driving this discussion.

I agree to change the proposal discussion from issue and dev mail list
to PR. It will be easier to review and comment, especially for large
proposals.
I have two questions about this change.
- Some proposals contain images, and putting those images into Pulsar
main repo will make the git db large. What's more, some images can be
up to several MBs
- After merging one proposal, if we want to update the content, do we
need to discuss it in the dev mail list or just push one PR to update
it?

Thanks,
Hang


PengHui Li  于2023年5月8日周一 18:06写道：
>
> Thanks for driving the improvements in proposal managing and reviewing.
> The proposal looks good to me. I have only one question about the dir name
> for the pips.
>
> For now, we have https://github.com/apache/pulsar/tree/master/wiki/proposals
> Is it better to use the existing one? Or change the existing one to "pip".
> I mean, we'd better don't use two dirs for proposals.
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 5:52 PM Asaf Mesika  wrote:
>
> > Ping, in case it was lost in the barrage of mails
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 10:38 AM Asaf Mesika 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I've summarized all comments from
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/5kpddlfh5xdbsjmv47ymnk3z6wd92jbh into a
> > > PIP.
> > >
> > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/20207
> > > 
> > >
> > > I'm leaving this discussion open for 2-3 days to make sure I haven't
> > > missed a comment, and proceed to vote, since we had most of the
> > discussion
> > > already in the link provided above.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Asaf
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Add checklist for PMC binding vote of PIP

[Hang Chen]

I agree with the motivation, and we should pay more attention to the
quality of the proposals.

When I write or review a proposal, I usually assume the readers are
engineers with enough Pulsar knowledge background and don't provide
enough context. It makes the proposal hard to understand for beginners
or someone interested in one feature. As Pulsar becomes a huge
project, we should make every change clear and understandable, which
can help Pulsar gain more adoption.

We can change the discussion title to "Make great proposal view."
because reviewing proposals is not just for PMCs. It is for everyone
interested in this change.

As Asaf said:
> The problem I'm trying to solve is: lack of ability to understand PIPs.PIPs I 
> had the chance of reading lack:
>* Background information: It should contain all background information 
>necessary to understand the problem and the solution
> * Clarity: It should be written in a coherent and easy to understand way.
> I thought this could improve using 2 ways:
> 1. Define a clear template for PIPs - this should solve all the missing 
> information. This is in progress.
> 2. Provide a checklist to verify the +1 voter check those 3 things:background 
> information, clarity, solid technical solution.

We could improve the proposal quality in 2 ways, one for the
proposal's template to guide writers on which section is necessary,
and the other for reviews to make an excellent proposal review.

We can make the checklist optional, and it is just a reminder for
reviewers which section is necessary and whether the context is clear.

> Being overly dependent on rules is not a replacement for open discussion.

Our goal is to make Pulsar better, right? We set up rules to help
reviewers work better doesn't mean we are overly dependent on rules.

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年5月8日周一 15:44写道：
>
> > 2. I think the project should pay more attention to Rajan’s concerns
> about new contributors being either ignored or told they need a PIP for
> what seems to them a trivial change. We lose contributors. We need to
> handle that more gently by helping them figure how to better make their PR.
>
> Do we have the list of the trivial change that requires PIP?
> This is the latest one https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19944 that
> asked to create a proposal.
> Is it can be a trivial change that we shouldn't ask for a proposal?
>
> It doesn't look good to me that we should pay more attention to something
> that someone said.
> The discussion should be under the mailing list, otherwise, I can't
> understand the context.
> I must guess if there are some PRs that I asked for a proposal, but it is
> only a trivial change.
> like https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18663
>
> I think it will be better to have some individual discussions like
> "Why requires a proposal for xxx"
> If the author thinks it is just a trivial change but has been asked for a
> proposal.
>
> > Being overly dependent on rules is not a replacement for open discussion.
>
> I agree with this view. But I guess that's not to say we don't need rules
> rather rely too much on rules.
> Or introduce less necessary rules.
>
> Back to this discussion. I don't think it will introduce any mandatory
> rules.
> Just remind reviewers to try to fully consider the impact of new proposals.
> I think the template will help me to improve my review job.
>
> And the proposal is available for anyone in the community. It's not only
> for engineers.
> Without the template, maybe one person is not familiar with Pulsar's code,
> but he like the new feature. He can vote +1 unless he explicitly writes
> "I like the feature, it will help me with xxx. But I haven't checked the
> implementation details..."
> With the template, it's more clear for them to cast a vote.
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 1:58 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> > You asked. Here it is.
> >
> > 1. You brushed aside Enrico’s concerns with that comment. It was not
> > subtle.
> >
> > 2. I think the project should pay more attention to Rajan’s concerns about
> > new contributors being either ignored or told they need a PIP for what
> > seems to them a trivial change. We lose contributors. We need to handle
> > that more gently by helping them figure how to better make their PR.
> >
> > 3. For minor PIPs this is too much. Minor PIPs should be easy.
> >
> > 4. For master PIPs like your OTel nothing here is enough. Experience with
> > PIP-45 and PIP-192 is that there will be breakage, divergence, and not
> > everyone will agree on the result. You worked for 11 months in apparent
> > secrecy, yet seemingly ignored Lari’s similar open discussion about scaling
> > which occurred in the same time frame.
> >
> > Being overly dependent on rules is not a replacement for open discussion.
> >
> > Sorry if this seems harsh, but this is what I think as an individual.
> >
> > The ASF has a saying “Community over Code”
> >
> > Best,
> > Dave
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On May 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-261: Restructure Getting Started section

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Best,
Hang

tison  于2023年5月7日周日 20:32写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> N.B. IIRC PMC members have binding votes.
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> Yunze Xu  于2023年5月7日周日 20:12写道：
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze
> >
> > On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 5:20 PM Asaf Mesika  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > PIP-261 as been opened for quite some time, garnered feedback from 3
> > > people, which was implemented in the PIP.
> > >
> > > It is time to start the vote.
> > >
> > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/19912
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Asaf
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 3.0.0 Candidate 4

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

- Checksum and signatures
- Built from sources on MacOS (JDK 11 and Maven 3.8.6)
- Run rat check and check-binary-license on the source.
- Setup Pulsar cluster with one zookeeper node, one bookie node, and
one broker node
- Checked the Grafana dashboard metrics
- Run Pulsar perf produce and consume

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年4月29日周六 11:39写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - Checked the signature
> - Build from the source package
> - Start a standalone
> - Checked the Cassandra connection
> - Checked the stateful function
> - Checked the Pulsar SQL
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 7:47 PM Christophe Bornet 
> wrote:
>
> > This is the fourth release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 3.0.0.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/milestone/34?closed=1
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will
> > stay open for at least 72 hours ***
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > for convenience.
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-3.0.0-candidate-4/
> >
> > SHA-512 checksums:
> >
> > 7c74599ff52606c34c7123619beee37eb89f86a1f78daeb827915fd2275d976aa05469914b7485a3f4c2f67f663f397677c25be615dded386f896c1dbf32ea29
> >  ./apache-pulsar-3.0.0-bin.tar.gz
> >
> > e0e3919f4e8d79146dfabdef64986760339405c404ec2552db0dcb72081588f44d1b84b5cca9061956152892ff6d83aa94e6c2f2c5f3d722f0398a885721ed6e
> >  ./apache-pulsar-3.0.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1232/
> >
> > The tag to be voted upon:
> > v3.0.0-candidate-4 (7636e8989f4d3fc24fce69a356d54e1c550945ed)
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v3.0.0-candidate-4
> >
> > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> >
> > Docker images:
> >
> >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/cbornet/pulsar/3.0.0/images/sha256-43ba59feeef43ce54f00ca80af53c075f3d98caf6d150215c988f78ccecc89c0?context=repo
> >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/cbornet/pulsar-all/3.0.0/images/sha256-19bf90d5404d8bbdf181e9270c46b3423e8d06d8db3e23cc2a5bc86034482179?context=repo
> >
> > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build and
> > run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/validate-release-candidate
> >
> > This release candidate contains docker images for both AMD64 and ARM64
> > architectures. Please indicate which architecture you could test when
> > casting your vote.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Christophe Bornet
> >

Re: Call for projects and mentors for OSPP 2023

[Hang Chen]

Hi Dianjin,

Thank you for sharing the exciting news about Apache Pulsar's
participation in OSPP 2023.

## Project Info
Project Name: BookKeeper journal supports Direct IO
Project Description: Apache BookKeeper is the storage layer of Apache
Pulsar, and it plays a key role in Apache Pulsar's performance. The
Pulsar broker writes data to the BookKeeper cluster and waits for the
write response. The BookKeeper's bookie node receives the write
requests and persists the data into the storage layer. BookKeeper's
storage layer has two types of storage. One is Journal, and the other
is Ledger. Journal is a WAL log of the bookie. Once the write request
data is persisted into the Journal disk, the bookie will send the
write response to the Pulsar broker. The ledger supports the data
storage layer of the bookie and provides data read and write. Ledger
already supports the Direct IO to improve the read and write
throughput, but Journal still relies on the OS PageCache. We need to
make Journal also support Direct IO to improve the BookKeeper's write
performance.

Difficulty Level:
- [ ] Basic
- [x] Advanced

Project Output Requirements:
Item 1: Write a proposal for the journal Direct IO support
Item 2: Journal support Direct IO
Item 3: Add unit tests for the Direct IO support
Item 4: Add performance test result

Project Technical Requirements:
Item 1: Get the knowledge of Apache BookKeeper to write logic
Item 2: Get knowledge of Linux Direct IO
Item 3: Get knowledge of how the current ledger uses Direct IO


## Mentor Info
Mentor Name: chenhang
Mentor Email: chenh...@apache.org


Thanks,
Hang

Yu  于2023年4月25日周二 23:44写道：
>
> Hi Dianjin,
>
> Thanks for your reminder!
>
> Please check my application here (
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fSVi1ELO7hGSF6_Cm1O9A-kw7covij882_cajLg4Jzs/edit#),
> which is more user-friendly to read and re-use info.
>
> Also, attach here for your quick reference.
>
> English Version
>
> # Project Info
>
> ## Project Name
>
> Optimizing the findability of Pulsar documentation with SEO strategies
>
> ## Project Description
>
> Recently, the Apache Pulsar community has witnessed robust and energetic
> growth with faster release iterations and comprehensive documentation,
> providing delightful experiences for Pulsar users. As more and more users
> search Pulsar-relevant content on Google, the findability of Pulsar
> documentation is increasingly important since higher organic search
> rankings can build brand awareness and enhance competitiveness. So this
> project aims to improve the findability and searchability of content on the
> Pulsar documentation website by applying effective SEO strategies. It
> includes but is not limited to the following aspects:
>
> - Provide recommendations and make changes accordingly: perform an audit
> (criteria + verifications) of the Pulsar documentation and provide
> recommendations (issues + priorities) for improvement that support the
> Pulsar user journey.
>
> - Earn featured snippets to set Pulsar documentation “position zero” on
> Google search results.
>
> - Add description metadata to increase click-through rates to Pulsar
> documentation by showing appealing excerpts.
>
> - Add alt tags for images to enable search engines to crawl visuals and
> empower screen readers to process images.
>
> ### References
>
> - Pulsar documentation website: https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/next/
>
> - Task info | Optimizing Pulsar SEO:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xGvp7msOYGjh-YDI1JtJ_ORWACEPWnBlhMMkZbylefQ/edit#heading=h.14qgj6cz
>
> ## Difficulty Level
>
> [ ] Basic
>
> [x] Advanced
>
> ## Project Validation Requirements
>
> - For the project
>
> 1) Submit a report of improvement suggestions for Pulsar documentation and
> corresponding documentation changes.
>
> 2) Improve SEO for the Pulsar documentation website by earning “feature
> snippets”, adding “description metadata”, and inserting “alt tags”.
>
> 3) Submit a performance comparison report of SEO results for Pulsar
> documentation.
>
> 4) Document best practices for Pulsar SEO implementation.
>
> - For the student
>
> Acquire new skills and gain useful experience to level up your portfolio.
> For example,
>
> Learn the ins and outs of open source by being mentored by experienced
> community members.
>
> Strengthen your abilities of communication and collaboration by balancing
> requirements and resolving issues.
>
> Build your network by deeply working with industry veterans.
>
> ## Project Technical Requirements
>
> - Strong communication, problem-solving, and holistic thinking abilities.
>
> - Excellent skills in English and technical writing.
>
> - Familiarity with Docs as Code (e.g., Git, Markdown, Docusaurus, Swagger).
>
> - Previous experience in open-source projects.
>
> - Proficiency in any programming language or major in computer science is
> preferred.
>
> ## Project Repo
>
> - Pulsar documentation and website repo:
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site
>
> - Pulsar 

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.4 Candidate 4

[Hang Chen]

+1(binding)

- Checksum and signatures
- Built from sources on MacOS (JDK 11 and Maven 3.8.6)
- Run rat check and check-binary-license on the source.
- Setup Pulsar cluster with one zookeeper node, one bookie node, and
one broker node
- Checked the Grafana dashboard metrics
- Run Pulsar perf produce and consume
- Run HDFS-based tiered storage offload and consume
- Triggered the Pulsar CI [1], and all the tests passed


Regards,
Hang

[1] https://github.com/hangc0276/pulsar/pull/19

guo jiwei  于2023年4月18日周二 11:15写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - Check the signature
> - Build from the source package
> - Start the standalone
> - Validate Pub/Sub and Java Functions
> - Validate Stateful Functions
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 8:52 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > - Checked the signature
> > - Build from the source package
> > - Start standalone
> > - Checked cassandra connector
> > - Checked state function
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 5:37 PM  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (Binding)
> > >
> > >  • Built from the source package (maven 3.8.6 OpenJDK 11)
> > >  • Ran binary package standalone with pub/sub
> > >  • Ran docker image(pulsar-all) standalone with pub/sub
> > >  • Ran License check
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > > On Apr 12, 2023, 17:10 +0800, Xiangying Meng ,
> > > wrote:
> > > > This is the fourth release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.4.
> > > >
> > > > This release contains 126 commits by 37 contributors.
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v2.10.3...v2.10.4-candidate-4
> > > >
> > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > > open
> > > > for at least 72 hours ***
> > > >
> > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > > > convenience.
> > > >
> > > > Source and binary files:
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.4-candidate-4/
> > > >
> > > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > > >
> > > 63343005235be32e970574c9733f06cb472adfdd6511d53b91902d66c805b21cee4039b51b69013bf0f9cbcde82f4cd944c069a7d119d1c908a40716ff82eca3
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.10.4-bin.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > 2d3398a758917bccefa8550f3f69ec8a72a29f541bcd45963e6fddaec024cc690b33f1d49392dc2437e332e90a89e47334925a50960c5f8960e34c1ac8ed2543
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.10.4-src.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1226
> > > >
> > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > v2.10.4-candidate-4
> > > > (1fe05d5cd3ec9f70cd7179efa4b69eac72fd88bd)
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.4-candidate-4
> > > >
> > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > > > https://downloads.apache.org/pulsar/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > Docker images:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > https://hub.docker.com/layers/xiangyingmeng/pulsar/2.10.4/images/sha256-8b76d49401d3fe398be3cde395fb164ad8722b64691e31c44991f32746ca8119?context=repo
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > https://hub.docker.com/layers/xiangyingmeng/pulsar-all/2.10.4/images/sha256-c20a13ed215e4837f95a99cf84914d03f557204d44ed610dfc41d2e23a77a92c?context=repo
> > > >
> > > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build
> > > > and run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.1 Candidate-2

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

- Checksum and signatures
- Built from sources on MacOS (JDK 17 and Maven 3.8.6)
- Run rat check and check-binary-license on the source.
- Setup Pulsar cluster with one zookeeper node, one bookie node, and
one broker node
- Checked the Grafana dashboard metrics
- Run Pulsar perf produce and consume

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2023年4月18日周二 11:27写道：
>
> Ah, yes, it works after setting `PULSAR_STANDALONE_USE_ZOOKEEPER=1`
> We need to push a PR to fix the validation document.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:14 PM Haiting Jiang 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Penghui
> >
> > Did you set `PULSAR_STANDALONE_USE_ZOOKEEPER=1` when verifying
> > Stateful Functions ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Haiting
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 7:48 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> > >
> > > The RC version failed to verify the state function
> > >
> > > The output:
> > >
> > > ```
> > > ~/Downloads/release_2.11.1/apache-pulsar-2.11.1 » bin/pulsar-admin
> > > functions status --tenant test --namespace test-namespace --name
> > word_count
> > > {
> > >   "numInstances" : 1,
> > >   "numRunning" : 1,
> > >   "instances" : [ {
> > > "instanceId" : 0,
> > > "status" : {
> > >   "running" : true,
> > >   "error" : "",
> > >   "numRestarts" : 0,
> > >   "numReceived" : 15,
> > >   "numSuccessfullyProcessed" : 0,
> > >   "numUserExceptions" : 15,
> > >   "latestUserExceptions" : [ {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731596735
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731596736
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731596737
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731596738
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731596738
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731656845
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731656845
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731656846
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731656847
> > >   }, {
> > > "exceptionString" : "State test/test-namespace/word_count is not
> > > enabled.",
> > > "timestampMs" : 1681731656847
> > >   } ],
> > >   "numSystemExceptions" : 0,
> > >   "latestSystemExceptions" : [ ],
> > >   "averageLatency" : 0.146536533,
> > >   "lastInvocationTime" : 1681731656847,
> > >   "workerId" : "c-standalone-fw-localhost-8080"
> > > }
> > >   } ]
> > > }
> > >
> > -
> > > ~/Downloads/release_2.11.1/apache-pulsar-2.11.1 » bin/pulsar-admin
> > > functions querystate --tenant test --namespace test-namespace --name
> > > word_count -k hello -w
> > > # key 'hello' doesn't exist.
> > > # key 'hello' doesn't exist.
> > > # key 'hello' doesn't exist
> > > State storage client is not done initializing. Please try again in a
> > little
> > > while.
> > >
> > > Reason: State storage client is not done initializing. Please try again
> > in
> > > a little while.
> > > ```
> > >
> > > The logs from broker:
> > >
> > > ```
> > > 2023-04-17T19:42:55,447+0800 [pulsar-web-48-15] INFO
> > >  org.eclipse.jetty.server.RequestLog - 127.0.0.1 - -
> > [17/Apr/2023:19:42:55
> > > +0800] "GET /admin/v2/namespaces/test HTTP/1.1" 200 23 "-"
> > > "Pulsar-Java-v2.11.1" 5
> > > 2023-04-17T19:42:55,450+0800 [pulsar-web-48-4] INFO
> > >  org.apache.pulsar.common.nar.NarUnpacker - Created directory
> > >
> > /var/folders/t4/w6thygwj0y596w0j5h_pzlw4gn/T/pulsar-nar/functions4142072620718955215.tmp-unpacked
> > > 2023-04-17T19:42:55,451+0800 [pulsar-web-48-4] INFO
> > >  org.apache.pulsar.common.nar.NarUnpacker - Extracting
> > >
> > /var/folders/t4/w6thygwj0y596w0j5h_pzlw4gn/T/functions4142072620718955215.tmp
> > > to
> > >
> > /var/folders/t4/w6thygwj0y596w0j5h_pzlw4gn/T/pulsar-nar/functions4142072620718955215.tmp-unpacked/3E3BMXidvkyl6VKTjb2b4Q
> > > 2023-04-17T19:42:55,452+0800 [pulsar-web-48-4] ERROR
> > > org.apache.pulsar.common.nar.NarUnpacker - There was a problem extracting
> > > the 

Re: [BUGS] Pulsar 3.0 GKE Cluster Won't Start

[Hang Chen]

452)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.parseMessageMetadata(Commands.java:445)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.peekMessageMetadata(Commands.java:1899)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.peekAndCopyMessageMetadata(Commands.java:1918)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.AbstractBaseDispatcher.filterEntriesForConsumer(AbstractBaseDispatcher.java:142)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.AbstractBaseDispatcher.filterEntriesForConsumer(AbstractBaseDispatcher.java:100)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.internalReadEntriesComplete(PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.java:210)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.lambda$readEntriesComplete$1(PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.java:151)
> > > ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0.jar:3.0.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.bookkeeper.common.util.SingleThreadExecutor.safeRunTask(SingleThreadExecutor.java:137)
> > > ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-common-4.16.0.jar:4.16.0]
> > > at 
> > > org.apache.bookkeeper.common.util.SingleThreadExecutor.run(SingleThreadExecutor.java:113)
> > > ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-common-4.16.0.jar:4.16.0]
> > > at 
> > > io.netty.util.concurrent.FastThreadLocalRunnable.run(FastThreadLocalRunnable.java:30)
> > > ~[io.netty-netty-common-4.1.89.Final.jar:4.1.89.Final]
> > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?]
> > >
> > > Now that we have a consistent way to reproduce it, I'll work on
> > > understanding the root cause. I believe we run with these two settings
> > > with other versions, so this feels like a regression. I cannot say for
> > > sure yet.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 1:47 AM Enrico Olivelli  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dave,
> > > > IIUC (from offline discussion) those tests started to fail only 
> > > > recently,
> > > > as we run those tests against the master branch of apache/pulsar repo.
> > > >
> > > > Does the beginning of failures match the upgrade to BK 4.16 ?
> > > > The problem may be related to the handling of ByteBufs, IIRC there are a
> > > > few changes in the latest
> > > > BK release.
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > > Il giorno gio 13 apr 2023 alle ore 05:02 Hang Chen 
> > > >  ha
> > > > scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Dave,
> > > > > Thanks for verifying this release candidate. I have setup the 
> > > > > Pulsar
> > > > > cluster with 3.0 on my laptop and test the produce and consume, it 
> > > > > works
> > > > > fine. We also deploy the it on k8s, the produce, consume and health 
> > > > > check
> > > > > also works fine. Would you please share your broker configurations?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hang
> > > > >
> > > > > Dave Fisher  于2023年4月13日周四 06:49写道：
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi -
> > > > >>
> > > > >> We do End to end testing of Pulsar versions on GCP and with Pulsar 
> > > > >> 3.0
> > > > >> today we have the following problem.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This image shows the broker deployments not coming up. This is a 
> > > > >> non-TLS
> > > > >> setup.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [image: Screen Shot 2023-04-12 at 1.09.59 PM.png]
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The Broker Pods have errors like this one:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 2023-04-12T20:10:35,995+ 
> > > > >> [broker-topic-workers-OrderedExecutor-3-0] ERROR 
> > > > >> org

Re: [BUGS] Pulsar 3.0 GKE Cluster Won't Start

[Hang Chen]

Hi Dave,
Thanks for verifying this release candidate. I have setup the Pulsar
cluster with 3.0 on my laptop and test the produce and consume, it works
fine. We also deploy the it on k8s, the produce, consume and health check
also works fine. Would you please share your broker configurations?

Thanks,
Hang

Dave Fisher  于2023年4月13日周四 06:49写道：

> Hi -
>
> We do End to end testing of Pulsar versions on GCP and with Pulsar 3.0
> today we have the following problem.
>
> This image shows the broker deployments not coming up. This is a non-TLS
> setup.
>
> [image: Screen Shot 2023-04-12 at 1.09.59 PM.png]
>
> The Broker Pods have errors like this one:
>
> 2023-04-12T20:10:35,995+ [broker-topic-workers-OrderedExecutor-3-0] ERROR 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands - 
> [PersistentSubscription{topic=persistent://pulsar/pulsar/10.236.0.4:8080/healthcheck,
>  name=healthCheck-04a8e22e-3e0b-4aa3-9141-d8970c1b0712}] [-1] Failed to parse 
> message metadata
> java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: readerIndex(96) + length(2) exceeds 
> writerIndex(96): UnpooledDuplicatedByteBuf(ridx: 96, widx: 96, cap: 96, 
> unwrapped: CompositeByteBuf(ridx: 96, widx: 96, cap: 96, components=2))
>   at 
> io.netty.buffer.AbstractByteBuf.checkReadableBytes0(AbstractByteBuf.java:1442)
>  ~[io.netty-netty-buffer-4.1.89.Final.jar:4.1.89.Final]
>   at io.netty.buffer.AbstractByteBuf.readShort(AbstractByteBuf.java:749) 
> ~[io.netty-netty-buffer-4.1.89.Final.jar:4.1.89.Final]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.skipBrokerEntryMetadataIfExist(Commands.java:1692)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.parseMessageMetadata(Commands.java:452)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.parseMessageMetadata(Commands.java:445)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.peekMessageMetadata(Commands.java:1899)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.Commands.peekAndCopyMessageMetadata(Commands.java:1918)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-common-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.AbstractBaseDispatcher.filterEntriesForConsumer(AbstractBaseDispatcher.java:142)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.AbstractBaseDispatcher.filterEntriesForConsumer(AbstractBaseDispatcher.java:100)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.internalReadEntriesComplete(PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.java:210)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.persistent.PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.lambda$readEntriesComplete$1(PersistentDispatcherSingleActiveConsumer.java:151)
>  ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-3.0.0-SNAPSHOT.jar:3.0.0-SNAPSHOT]
>   at 
> org.apache.bookkeeper.common.util.SingleThreadExecutor.safeRunTask(SingleThreadExecutor.java:137)
>  ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-common-4.16.0.jar:4.16.0]
>   at 
> org.apache.bookkeeper.common.util.SingleThreadExecutor.run(SingleThreadExecutor.java:113)
>  ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-common-4.16.0.jar:4.16.0]
>   at 
> io.netty.util.concurrent.FastThreadLocalRunnable.run(FastThreadLocalRunnable.java:30)
>  ~[io.netty-netty-common-4.1.89.Final.jar:4.1.89.Final]
>   at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) ~[?:?]
>
> We looked into this but aren’t sure what would cause this to suddenly be
> an issue. The candidate would be differences in the new version of BK …
>
> Best,
> Dave
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.9.5

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2023年2月20日周一 21:11写道：
>
> +1
>
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno lun 20 feb 2023 alle ore 10:41 Zike Yang  ha 
> scritto:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Zike Yang
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 12:57 PM  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello, Pulsar community:
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose releasing Apache Pulsar 2.9.5. It's been about
> > > two months since 2.9.4 was released.
> > >
> > > There are 54 PRs [0] needed to cherry-pick in branch-2.9. I will
> > > cherry-pick these PRs for branch-2.9. Exclude some PRs that merge
> > > directly into branch-2.9.
> > >
> > > There are 21 PRs [1] opened. I'll follow up on each of those PRs to
> > > see if they will be completed soon or will need to be pushed to 2.9.6
> > >
> > > If you have any important fixes or any questions, please reply to this
> > > email, and we will evaluate whether to include them in 2.9.5
> > >
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > >
> > > [0] 
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.5+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.9+is%3Aclosed+
> > > [1] 
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.5

Re: [PROPOSAL] Roadmap for 3.0 release

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Christophe Bornet  于2023年2月20日周一 21:46写道：
>
> +1
>
> Also, I'd like to volunteer as a release manager for this release.
>
> Christophe
>
>
>
>
> Le ven. 17 févr. 2023 à 23:44, Matteo Merli  a écrit :
> >
> > Since the LTS release model has been formally approved, I'm proposing
> > the following schedule for the release:
> >
> >  * Tue - 2023-05-11
> >- RC-1
> >- Code Freeze -- Only critical fixes will be merged in the 3.0
> > release branch. Contributors should plan to have all the changes merged in
> > before this date. Exceptions should be extremely rare and strongly
> > motivated.
> >
> >  * Tue - 2023-05-18 - RC-2
> >  * Tue - 2023-05-25 - RC-3
> >  * Tue - 2023-05-02 - Announce 3.0 Release
> >
> > These dates will be published on the website to present users with a
> > "roadmap" and we should commit to and respect these dates.
> >
> > I also wanted to propose trying out a model where we have 3 release
> > managers for all major releases.
> >
> > The reasoning behind this is for this small group of people to collaborate
> > and divide the tasks for the release: merging patches from the "master"
> > branch, preparing RC, and testing.
> >
> > Since everyone also has other work duties and unexpected tasks that can pop
> > up at any time, it will help to have redundancy in the release-management
> > "team", so that we can release on the exact dates.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Matteo
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-175: Extend time based release process

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Haiting Jiang  于2023年2月14日周二 10:27写道：
>
> Hi Matteo,
>
> I noticed that 2.10 is not mentioned to be the first LTS version as
> discussed previously.
> Should we include this?
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 10:26 AM Yunze Xu  
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 6:47 PM Nicolò Boschi  wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Nicolò Boschi
> > >
> > >
> > > Il giorno gio 9 feb 2023 alle ore 11:17 Zike Yang  ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zike Yang
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 5:28 PM PengHui Li  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Penghui
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Feb 9, 2023, at 17:24, Nozomi Kurihara  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The LTS plan seems clear and helpful for users.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Nozomi
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2023年2月9日(木) 5:44 Matteo Merli :
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15966
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > 
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ## Motivation
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> In PIP-47 (
> > > > > >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-47:-Time-Based-Release-Plan),
> > > > we
> > > > > >> have adopted a time-based release plan. This was the first attempt 
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >> establishing a new principle on how releases should b
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The main two benefits of this approach have been:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 1. Clarity for users and developers on when to expect a release
> > > > > >> 2. Breaking a hard relationship between feature and release: a
> > > > particular
> > > > > >> feature will be included in the release if it is completed in time.
> > > > > >> Otherwise, it will be bubbled up to the next release.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The motivation for the current proposal is to extend the existing
> > > > process
> > > > > >> to address the issues that we have seen and that were left out of 
> > > > > >> the
> > > > scope
> > > > > >> of PIP-47.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ## Summary of existing issues in the process
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ### Short maintenance cycles for releases
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Since we're doing a 3 months release cycle, we are ending with 4
> > > > releases
> > > > > >> done per year, even though it's more close to 3 releases.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> There is a high cost to maintain a lot of old releases, backport 
> > > > > >> bug
> > > > fixes,
> > > > > >> and security patches. In general, we actively support the last 3 
> > > > > >> minor
> > > > > >> releases while continuing to develop the next release. E.g., 2.8,
> > > > 2.9, and
> > > > > >> 2.10, while 2.11 is under development.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The result is that a user adopting a particular release is forced 
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >> upgrade in a < 1-year timeframe to keep up to date and use a 
> > > > > >> supported
> > > > > >> release. This timeframe is too short for many users as it imposes a
> > > > lot of
> > > > > >> forced upgrades, for which they are not prepared in terms of
> > > > available time
> > > > > >> and required effort.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ### Live Upgrade/Downgrade compatibility path
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> In Pulsar, we guarantee that users have a way to do live upgrades 
> > > > > >> and
> > > > > >> downgrades with zero downtime.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This is very powerful because it gives them the freedom to upgrade 
> > > > > >> to
> > > > a new
> > > > > >> release with the assurance of being able to roll back to the 
> > > > > >> previous
> > > > > >> release in case any functional or performance regressions are
> > > > encountered.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Today, this compatibility is guaranteed across minor versions. Eg: 
> > > > > >> I
> > > > can do
> > > > > >> `2.7 -> 2.8 -> 2.7` as a live upgrade.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> What is not guaranteed is to "skip" releases. E.g.: `2.7 -> 2.9`
> > > > might work
> > > > > >> or not, but it's not guaranteed. In that case an intermediated 
> > > > > >> upgrade
> > > > > >> would be required: `2.7 -> 2.8 -> 2.9`.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The reasons for which the "skip" upgrade might not work are 
> > > > > >> multiple:
> > > > > >>  1. Incompatible upgrade of some dependency (e.g., ZooKeeper) that
> > > > might
> > > > > >> not be compatible with an older version.
> > > > > >>  2. Adoption of a new metadata format or data format on disk.
> > > > > >> Every time we introduce a new incompatible format change 
> > > > > >> (outside
> > > > of a
> > > > > >> regular Protobuf field addition), we do it in a 2 steps way:
> > > > > >>  - In a new release, we introduce the new feature/format,
> > > > disabled by
> > > > > >> default. The new release can 

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate-5

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Please highlight the limitations of using RocksDB as metastore in the
standalone service.

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2023年1月10日周二 15:59写道：
>
> Il giorno mar 10 gen 2023 alle ore 07:18 guo jiwei
>  ha scritto:
> >
> > Thank you all,
> >
> > Close the vote with 5 bindings(PengHui, Enrico, Yunze, Jiwei, Hang), and
> > 1non-bindings(Bo).
> actually there are 2 non-binding votes:
> + Nicolò Boschi
>
> Enrico
> >
> > I will continue the release process.
> >
> > Regards
> > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 10:00 AM guo jiwei  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Hang
> > >The upgrade does not affect it. It will automatically detect if there
> > > is a zookeeper directory and will continue to use zookeeper.
> > > If the new user has requirements for standalone performance, just enable
> > > the zookeeper option.
> > >Also, we will notice this on the release note.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 8:40 PM Hang Chen  wrote:
> > >
> > >> +0 (binding)
> > >>
> > >> - Checked signature
> > >> - Checked license for pulsar and pulsar-shell
> > >> - Build from the source code (MacOS Intel, JDK 17, Maven 3.8.6)
> > >> - Run standalone Pulsar based on Zookeeper and RocksDB metastore
> > >> - Run Pulsar-perf to produce and consume messages
> > >> - Use pulsar-shell to get topics stats
> > >> - Run pulsar-io-lakehouse connector based on Pulsar 2.11.0
> > >>
> > >> When I ran Pulsar standalone based on RocksDB metastore, I found the
> > >> following issues.
> > >> - Create a 1 partitions topic failed with timeout using pulsar-admin
> > >> - Use Pulsar perf to produce topics with 5000 partitions, produce
> > >> failed with generate ledgerId timeout on the Broker side
> > >> - Create a 1000 partitions topic succeed using pulsar-admin, but
> > >> produce messages to the topic failed with timeout
> > >>
> > >> However, after I started Pulsar standalone based on Zookeeper
> > >> metastore, the above issues disappeared, and the topic could produce
> > >> and consume messages.
> > >>
> > >> Currently, the Pulsar standalone mode starts with RocksDB metastore by
> > >> default since 2.11.0, but it can not run well in some cases. I'm
> > >> unsure whether it will impact the current user who wants to start the
> > >> pulsar service in standalone mode. Even though Pulsar standalone is
> > >> not recommended to run in the production environment, we need to
> > >> ensure it can perform the best performance on one local node.
> > >>
> > >> If the standalone issue is the expected behavior, I will give my +1.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Hang
> > >>
> > >> Enrico Olivelli  于2023年1月9日周一 15:55写道：
> > >> >
> > >> > +1 (binding)
> > >> >
> > >> > - checked signatures/digests/rat
> > >> > - built from source
> > >> > - run smoke tests on the built binaries
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks
> > >> > Enrico
> > >> >
> > >> > Il giorno lun 9 gen 2023 alle ore 06:18 guo jiwei
> > >> >  ha scritto:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > +1 (binding)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > - Checked the signature
> > >> > > - Build from source
> > >> > > - Checked license(server and shell)
> > >> > > - Start standalone with zookeeper
> > >> > > - Checked function
> > >> > > - Checked Cassandra connector
> > >> > > - Checked stateful function
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Regards
> > >> > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 8:25 PM Nicolò Boschi 
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > About Pulsar Shell,
> > >> > > > 1) zip file is distributed as a commodity for Windows users since
> > >> the
> > >> > > > .tar.gz archive is more tricky to extract. If this is a problem, we
> > >> can
> > >> > > > discu

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Yunze Xu as a new PMC member in Apache Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

Congratulations, Yunze!

Best,
Hang

Nitin Goyal  于2023年1月10日周二 23:09写道：
>
> Congratulations! Yunze
>
> Best
> Nitin Goyal
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 6:06 PM r...@apache.org 
> wrote:
>
> > Congrats! Yunze
> >
> > Ruguo Yu  于2023年1月10日周二 09:32写道：
> >
> > > Congratulations, Yunze!
> > >
> > > On 2022/12/29 12:42:36 Haiting Jiang wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Yunze
> > Xu
> > > > (https://github.com/BewareMyPower) as a member of the PMC and we are
> > > > pleased to announce that he has accepted.
> > > >
> > > > He is very active in the community in the past few years and made a lot
> > > of great contributions.
> > > >
> > > > Welcome Yunze to the Apache Pulsar PMC.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Haiting Jiang on behalf of the Pulsar PMC
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate-5

[Hang Chen]

+0 (binding)

- Checked signature
- Checked license for pulsar and pulsar-shell
- Build from the source code (MacOS Intel, JDK 17, Maven 3.8.6)
- Run standalone Pulsar based on Zookeeper and RocksDB metastore
- Run Pulsar-perf to produce and consume messages
- Use pulsar-shell to get topics stats
- Run pulsar-io-lakehouse connector based on Pulsar 2.11.0

When I ran Pulsar standalone based on RocksDB metastore, I found the
following issues.
- Create a 1 partitions topic failed with timeout using pulsar-admin
- Use Pulsar perf to produce topics with 5000 partitions, produce
failed with generate ledgerId timeout on the Broker side
- Create a 1000 partitions topic succeed using pulsar-admin, but
produce messages to the topic failed with timeout

However, after I started Pulsar standalone based on Zookeeper
metastore, the above issues disappeared, and the topic could produce
and consume messages.

Currently, the Pulsar standalone mode starts with RocksDB metastore by
default since 2.11.0, but it can not run well in some cases. I'm
unsure whether it will impact the current user who wants to start the
pulsar service in standalone mode. Even though Pulsar standalone is
not recommended to run in the production environment, we need to
ensure it can perform the best performance on one local node.

If the standalone issue is the expected behavior, I will give my +1.

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2023年1月9日周一 15:55写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - checked signatures/digests/rat
> - built from source
> - run smoke tests on the built binaries
>
>
> Thanks
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno lun 9 gen 2023 alle ore 06:18 guo jiwei
>  ha scritto:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > - Checked the signature
> > - Build from source
> > - Checked license(server and shell)
> > - Start standalone with zookeeper
> > - Checked function
> > - Checked Cassandra connector
> > - Checked stateful function
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 8:25 PM Nicolò Boschi  wrote:
> >
> > > About Pulsar Shell,
> > > 1) zip file is distributed as a commodity for Windows users since the
> > > .tar.gz archive is more tricky to extract. If this is a problem, we can
> > > discuss it in another thread
> > > 2) The bug on Windows is not a blocker for the release since it's not a
> > > regression. We could fix it in 2.11.1
> > >
> > > Here's my vote:
> > >
> > > +1 non binding
> > >
> > > - Signature and checksum
> > > - LICENSE on server and shell
> > >
> > > - Rat check passes
> > >
> > > - Compile from source with JDK 17 on MacOs Intel
> > >
> > > - Run Pulsar standalone and produce-consume from CLI
> > >
> > > - Tested K8S installation with Datastax Pulsar helm chart and verified 
> > > TLS,
> > > offloads, transactions and ElasticSearch sink
> > >
> > > - Pulsar Shell commands
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nicolò Boschi
> > >
> > >
> > > Il giorno mer 4 gen 2023 alle ore 12:33 丛搏  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > system: mac os 12.6, Apple M1
> > > > maven: 3.8.5
> > > > java: OpenJDK 17.0.3
> > > >
> > > > - Checked the signature
> > > > - Checked LICENSE
> > > > - Start standalone with zookeeper stream storage
> > > > - Publish and consume messages
> > > > - Verified Function and State Function
> > > > - Verified Cassandra connector
> > > > - Build from the source package
> > > > - Run a simple transaction performance check
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Bo
> > > >
> > > > Yunze Xu  于2023年1月4日周三 16:41写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, I will give my +1 (binding).
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yunze
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 4:00 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it's ok.
> > > > > > 2.11.0 is the first release version of pulsar-shell
> > > > > > So it's not a regression that was introduced in 2.11.0 and not
> > > > > > critical security issues or license issues which will block users
> > > move
> > > > > > to the new version.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Penghui
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 3:36 PM Yunze Xu 
> > > > > >  > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +0 (binding)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Checked the signature
> > > > > > > - Build from source (Java 17, Ubuntu 20.04 WSL2)
> > > > > > > - Start standalone with KoP branch-2.11 (ab9d761f)
> > > > > > > - Verify Pulsar client 2.11.0, Kafka client 3.3.1 (through KoP)
> > > > > > > - Verify pulsar-shell on Ubuntu 20.04 WSL2 and Windows:
> > > > > > > 1. Use `client` command to produce and consume messages
> > > > > > > 2. Use `admin` command to create, list and delete topics
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I didn't give +1 because I have to modify the
> > > > > > > `bin/pulsar-admin-common.cmd` to make `pulsar-shell` work on
> > > Windows.
> > > > > > > I left a command here:
> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17243#discussion_r1061199501
> > > .
> > > > > > > Not sure if it's a blocker so I didn't give +1 or -1 until 

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Node.js Client Release 1.8.0 Candidate 2

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

- Check signatures
- Install from source on ubuntu 20.04 (node version >= 16.18 and npm
version >= 8.19.2)
- Run node producer and consumer to pub-sub messages

Thanks,
Hang

Yunze Xu  于2022年12月30日周五 10:54写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
> - Check signatures
> - Install from source
> - Install the NPM package via `npm install pulsar-client@1.8.0-rc.2`
> - Verify the producer, consumer, custom_logger examples with both two
> installation methods bove
>
> 
>
> However, I'm still wondering whether we still need to upload the
> `napi-xxx.tar.gz` files? These files seem totally useless for users,
> no matter in verification or using. We should not upload these files
> to our release SVN repo.
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:14 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Verify following the steps from
> > https://github.com/RobertIndie/pulsar-client-node-validation
> > - Start standalone (master branch)
> > - Start consumer (node ./examples/consumer.js)
> > - Start producer (node ./examples/producer.js)
> > - The consumer can receive the messages
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 1:45 PM Ran Gao  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > - Checked npm package
> > > https://www.npmjs.com/package/pulsar-client/v/1.8.0-rc.2
> > > - Checked source code + napi-darwin-unknown-arm64 work on macOS 12.6 (M1
> > > Pro chip)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ran Gao
> > >
> > > On 2022/12/27 08:29:35 Zike Yang wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > This is the second release candidate for the Apache Pulsar Node.js
> > > > client, version 1.8.0.
> > > >
> > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/milestone/13?closed=1
> > > >
> > > > Please download the source files and review this release candidate:
> > > > - Download the source package, verify shasum and asc
> > > > - Follow the README.md to build and run the Pulsar Node.js client.
> > > >
> > > > The rc package has been published to the npm registry:
> > > > https://www.npmjs.com/package/pulsar-client/v/1.8.0-rc.2
> > > > You can install it by `npm i pulsar-client@1.8.0-rc.2` and verify the
> > > package.
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> > > > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> > > >
> > > > Source files:
> > > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-node/pulsar-client-node-1.8.0-candidate-2/
> > > >
> > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > SHA-512 checksum:
> > > >
> > > 80f9de8ca73b9a0bc7d083c6ba92e86721d381aa0689858270e074ff505f887533c40c5625b85a8b0943ced352e93eaafe67eb9bcb5afefadb4bd29b594620c4
> > > >  pulsar-client-node-1.8.0.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > v1.8.0-rc.2
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-node/releases/tag/v1.8.0-rc.2
> > > >
> > > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
> > > > 1.8.0, as follows:
> > > > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > > > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zike Yang
> > > >
> > >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.11.0 Candidate-4

[Hang Chen]

-1 (binding)

When checking the `apache-pulsar-shell-2.11.0-shell.tar.gz` license, I
found a lot of third party jars are not included in the LICENSE file.

Thanks,
Hang

Haiting Jiang  于2022年12月27日周二 20:26写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - Checksum and signatures
>
> - Built from sources using JDK 17 and maven 3.8.6
>
> - Run rat check and check-binary-license on the source.
>
> - Run Pulsar standalone
>
> - Validate Pub/Sub and Java Functions
>
> - Validate Connectors
>
> - Validate Stateful Functions with `PULSAR_STANDALONE_USE_ZOOKEEPER=1`
>
> - Run simple performance check
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting
>
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 6:53 PM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > - verified checksums and signatures
> > - built sources
> > - run some smoke tests using the binaries built from source and using
> > the staged binaries
> >
> > great work
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il giorno mar 27 dic 2022 alle ore 10:14 丛搏  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > system: mac os 12.6, Apple M1
> > > maven: 3.8.5
> > > java: OpenJDK 17.0.3
> > >
> > > - Checked the signature
> > > - Checked LICENSE
> > > - Start standalone with zookeeper stream storage
> > > - Publish and consume messages
> > > - Verified Function and State Function
> > > - Verified Cassandra connector
> > > - Build from the source package
> > > - Run a simple transaction performance check
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bo

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.3 Candidate 1

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Verified
 - Checksum and signatures
 - Build from source with JDK17 and maven 3.8.6
 - Checked BookKeeper so lib
 - Start standalone cluster and run pulsar perf produce and consume
 - Run pulsar-lakehouse-connectors based on this release

Thanks,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2022年12月28日周三 11:21写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> maven: 3.8.6
> JDK: 17.0.3.1
> OS:  12.6
>
> - Checked the signature
> - Build from the source package
> - Checked LICENSE
> - Start standalone
> - Publish and consume messages
> - Verified Function and State Function
> - Verified Cassandra connector
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 9:16 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > OS: macOS 13.0.1 (22A400)
> > maven: 3.8.6
> > JDK: java version "11.0.7" 2020-04-14 LTS
> >
> > - Checked the signature
> > - Build from the source package
> > - Checked LICENSE
> > - Start standalone
> > - Publish and consume messages
> > - Verified Function and State Function
> > - Verified Cassandra connector
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 10:46 PM 丛搏  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > system: mac os 12.3.1, Intel
> > > maven: 3.6.1
> > > java: OpenJDK 17.0.1
> > >
> > > - Checked the signature
> > > - Checked LICENSE
> > > - Start standalone
> > > - Publish and consume messages
> > > - Verified Function and State Function
> > > - Verified Cassandra connector
> > > - Build from the source package
> > > - Run a simple transaction performance check
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bo
> > >
> > > Xiangying Meng  于2022年12月25日周日 20:42写道：
> > > >
> > > > This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.10.3.
> > > >
> > > > This release contains 155 commits by 50 contributors.
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v2.10.2...v2.10.3-candidate-1
> > > >
> > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > > open
> > > > for at least 72 hours ***
> > > >
> > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > for
> > > > convenience.
> > > >
> > > > Source and binary files:
> > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.10.3-candidate-1/
> > > >
> > > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > > >
> > >
> > 64518096acf4c2a5ef1dcc936cd645217291254cd5c18337a743db5b4caa70a48cfc969643fd18a16ba24421952155b597e1b84be997447fe21f0b12a0555cb1
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.10.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > >
> > >
> > ee542d64d4aa288200c06f42d71186e8797480263ab84aaeb50ac683d6ea675c298adf8207b3aa98dae378b9fc84e9ba3dc78902397a774d1756d5e1739ab475
> > > > apache-pulsar-2.10.3-src.tar.gz
> > > >
> > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1201/
> > > >
> > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > v2.10.3-candidate-1 (b69f4efa6058c3f51885a61a2b3acb46f8b730f4)
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.10.3-candidate-1
> > > >
> > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > Docker images:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/xiangyingmeng/pulsar/2.10.3/images/sha256-9034eca8a61c7edc6d5b3fb5aa214f2dbb45f89d00c4ac875931ca588645dc96?context=repo
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/xiangyingmeng/pulsar-all/2.10.3/images/sha256-c7a0323bf59f20ae29b362815302e272109453b8210f130a1daaa7b38918f884?context=repo
> > > >
> > > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to build
> > > > and run the Pulsar standalone service.
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.4 Candidate 3

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Verified
 - Checksum and signatures
 - Build from source with JDK8 and maven 3.8.6
 - Checked BookKeeper so lib
 - Start standalone cluster and run pulsar perf produce and consume
 - Run pulsar-lakehouse-connectors based on this release

Thanks,
Hang

Haiting Jiang  于2022年12月25日周日 16:43写道：
>
> +1 binding
>
> - Checksum and signatures
> - Built from sources with JDK11
> - Run Pulsar standalone
> - Validate Pub/Sub and Java Functions
> - Validate Connectors
> - Validate Stateful Functions
> - Run a simple performance check
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting
>
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2022 at 3:25 PM Haiting Jiang  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Tison and Enrico,
> >
> > Thanks for your information.
> >
> > Hi Bo,
> >
> > > I look at some discussions, https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12166.
> > > Maybe we need to upgrade the version of the bookkeeper, I am not sure
> > > whether we should upgrade the bookkeeper in branch-2.9.
> >
> > From the discussion in the issue, I think we should not add support
> > for Apple M1 in old branches.
> > We don't do major version upgrades of BK in pulsar minor versions.
> >
> > And I will continue to verify this version on the Intel chips based laptops.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Haiting
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 8:35 PM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
> > >
> > > Il Sab 24 Dic 2022, 11:44 丛搏  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > thanks for the information
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Bo
> > > >
> > > > tison  于2022年12月24日周六 18:25写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Well it's easy to find:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/12166#issuecomment-1237601981
> > > > >
> > > > > tison 于2022年12月24日 周六18:22写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Haiting,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think it's 2.11. You can search the issue on this error message. I
> > > > > > remember I refer to such one previously.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry I'm outing so cannot do the search for you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Haiting Jiang 于2022年12月24日 周六17:20写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi Bo,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I started standalone failed with the following errors on M1 mac,
> > > > > >> ```
> > > > > >> 2022-12-24T17:08:58,944+0800 [main] ERROR
> > > > > >> org.apache.pulsar.PulsarStandaloneStarter - Failed to start pulsar
> > > > > >> service.
> > > > > >> java.io.IOException: Failed to load RocksDB JNI library
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.KeyValueStorageRocksDB.(KeyValueStorageRocksDB.java:98)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.KeyValueStorageRocksDB.(KeyValueStorageRocksDB.java:89)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.KeyValueStorageRocksDB.lambda$static$0(KeyValueStorageRocksDB.java:63)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.LedgerMetadataIndex.(LedgerMetadataIndex.java:68)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.SingleDirectoryDbLedgerStorage.(SingleDirectoryDbLedgerStorage.java:170)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.DbLedgerStorage.newSingleDirectoryDbLedgerStorage(DbLedgerStorage.java:150)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.storage.ldb.DbLedgerStorage.initialize(DbLedgerStorage.java:129)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at org.apache.bookkeeper.bookie.Bookie.(Bookie.java:818)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.proto.BookieServer.newBookie(BookieServer.java:152)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > org.apache.bookkeeper.proto.BookieServer.(BookieServer.java:120)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.bookkeeper-bookkeeper-server-4.14.5.jar:4.14.5]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.pulsar.zookeeper.LocalBookkeeperEnsemble.runBookies(LocalBookkeeperEnsemble.java:317)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-zookeeper-utils-2.9.4.jar:2.9.4]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > org.apache.pulsar.zookeeper.LocalBookkeeperEnsemble.startStandalone(LocalBookkeeperEnsemble.java:445)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-zookeeper-utils-2.9.4.jar:2.9.4]
> > > > > >> at 
> > > > > >> org.apache.pulsar.PulsarStandalone.start(PulsarStandalone.java:269)
> > > > > >> ~[org.apache.pulsar-pulsar-broker-2.9.4.jar:2.9.4]
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>
> > > > 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-224: Introduce TopicMessageId for consumer's MessageId related APIs

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Yunze Xu  于2022年12月28日周三 11:53写道：
>
> After discussing with @hangc0276 offline, I decided to add a
> `Schema` implementation in this proposal to serialize
> both the owner topic and the base `MessageId`. You can see the latest
> update on GitHub. If any of you have any concern, feel free to let me
> know.
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 1:22 AM Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il Ven 23 Dic 2022, 05:46 Yunze Xu  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > It needs the 3rd binding +1 yet. Could anyone else take a look?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Yunze
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 3:21 PM 丛搏  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Yunze,
> > > >
> > > > add `TopicMessageId ` will couple messageID and `topic name` together,
> > > > which is very unclear for non-partition-topic.
> > > >
> > > > ```
> > > > void seek(String topicName, MessageId messageId) throws
> > > PulsarClientException;
> > > > List> getLastTopicMessageId() throws
> > > > PulsarClientException;
> > > > ```
> > > > If the interface is designed in this way, it may be simpler, easier to
> > > > understand, and more intuitive for users, and MessageID will not be
> > > > coupled with TopicName.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Bo
> > > >
> > > > Yunze Xu  于2022年12月16日周五 15:31写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, it's an implementation detail and I will keep the same semantics
> > > > > with the latest master when I push my PR.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yunze
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 3:03 PM 丛搏  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if you don't change this in PIP-229 or PIP-224, I will create a new
> > > > > > PIP to handle the `BatchMessageIdImpl` and `MessageIdImpl`
> > > > > > `compareTo()` method, now I have no problem with this PIP
> > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > Sorry to bother this PIP vote.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Bo
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yunze Xu  于2022年12月16日周五 11:58写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If this breaking change can pass the PMC votes, I will keep the 
> > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > semantics in PIP-229. Otherwise, it would not make sense to adopt
> > > the
> > > > > > > new semantics in PIP-229.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Yunze
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 11:46 AM Yunze Xu 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I cannot find any confusing code from the proposal itself. Could
> > > you
> > > > > > > > point it out? If you are mentioning the `legacyCompare` and
> > > `compare`
> > > > > > > > methods in #18890 [1], it's not related to this proposal. And I
> > > have
> > > > > > > > opened PIP-229 [2] for discussion.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > BTW, the PIP-229 itself doesn't mention the compare logic. But
> > > I'm not
> > > > > > > > going to adopt the new semantics because it's actually a 
> > > > > > > > breaking
> > > > > > > > change, just as I've replied. You might think it's a bug, but
> > > it's a
> > > > > > > > public API. Any change of the semantics in the public API is a
> > > > > > > > breaking change.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/18890/files
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/x52zpwlo8pxzp81oxllh5vw82kyrzgpk
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 11:34 AM 丛搏 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Although unrelated, it adds a lot of confusing code.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Bo
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yunze Xu  于2022年12月16日周五
> > > 08:05写道：
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This proposal is not related to the comparison logic between
> > > > > > > > > > BatchMessageIdImpl and MessageIdImpl.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Yunze
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:58 PM 丛搏 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > sorry, I have one question about the BatchMessageId
> > > compareTo()
> > > > > > > > > > > method. the discussion mail :
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/8n3oyk2hdsskkotnj4lnlvfnndctpqbg.
> > > > > > > > > > > I hope it can be this issue can be discussed clearly.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I hope it can be this issue can be discussed clearly. I
> > > will retry to
> > > > > > > > > > > vote until this issue clearly :
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Bo
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 丛搏  于2022年12月14日周三 22:56写道：
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Bo
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > PengHui Li  于2022年12月14日周三 19:12写道：
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-228: Refactor the information architecture of Pulsar client docs

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年12月22日周四 10:48写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 10:18 AM 丛搏  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bo
> >
> > Yu  于2022年12月21日周三 09:51写道：
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 3:12 PM Yunze Xu 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Yunze
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 3:06 PM Zike Yang  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Zike Yang
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 4:38 PM Jun Ma 
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm going to start the vote for PIP-228 [Refactor the information
> > > > architecture of Pulsar client docs](
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18822).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And this is the original thread for discussion:
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/bv6lwnt708dxst173knyzv2bfy4d1ox4.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The vote will be open for at least three days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you.
> > > > > > Jun
> > > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Client C++ Release 3.1.0 Candidate 3

[Hang Chen]

Hi Zike, thanks for your explanation.

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Zike Yang  于2022年12月9日周五 15:41写道：
>
> Hi, Hang
>
> Thanks for your verification.
>
> >  - When running produce and consume, and the client calls close, it
> shows `ConnectError` in the close method
>
> I have created an issue to track it. [0] This issue was not introduced
> in 3.1.0. It does not need to be a blocker.
>
> > When build the source code with g++ 11.3.0, it failed with the
> following exception
>
> It's a known issue here [1] when compiling the test using g++ 11.3.0.
> There is already a fix for it: [2]. It only affects the test code. We
> can compile the code using the older g++ version like g++ 9.4.0.
> Therefore, it's also not a blocker here.
>
> > When build perf under perf directory, it failed with the following 
> > exception.
>
> We should not build the perf in the perf directory. We need to turn on
> the perf build at the root path of the project using the command
> `cmake -DBUILD_PERF_TOOLS=ON`. And after compiling the code using
> `make`, we can get the perf tool in the perf directory. FYI: [3]
>
> We have tracked all these issues. I think they are not the blockers
> for the release of C++ client 3.1.0. We can go on the vote. Thanks for
> reporting these issues.
>
> [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/issues/140
> [1] https://github.com/google/googletest/issues/4079
> [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/pull/133
> [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp#checks
>
> Thanks,
> Zike Yang
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 11:52 AM Hang Chen  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Zike, thanks for your great job!
> >
> > Verified:
> >  - Verified checksum and signatures
> >  - Build from source code on Ubuntu 20.04
> >  - Verified produce and test on DEB followed by [0]
> >
> >  I found the following issues.
> >
> >  - When running produce and consume, and the client calls close, it
> > shows `ConnectError` in the close method
> >  ```
> > 2022-12-09 03:33:45.288 INFO  [139648501270080] ConsumerImpl:1083 |
> > [persistent://public/default/basic_e2e_example, sub, 0] Closed
> > consumer 0
> > 2022-12-09 03:33:45.289 INFO  [139648476091968] ClientConnection:1584
> > | [127.0.0.1:43644 -> 127.0.0.1:6650] Connection closed with
> > ConnectError
> > 2022-12-09 03:33:45.289 INFO  [139648476091968] ClientConnection:267 |
> > [127.0.0.1:43644 -> 127.0.0.1:6650] Destroyed connection
> > ```
> >
> >  - When build the source code with g++ 11.3.0, it failed with the
> > following exception
> > ```
> > /usr/include/c++/11/ostream:750:5: error: no type named 'type' in
> > 'struct std::enable_if'
> > In file included from /usr/include/gtest/internal/gtest-internal.h:57,
> >  from /usr/include/gtest/gtest.h:62,
> >  from
> > /home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/tests/KeyValueSchemaTest.cc:19:
> > ```
> >
> >  - When build perf under perf directory, it failed with the following 
> > exception.
> >  ```
> >  root@5b313881db52:/home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/perf/build# make
> > [ 25%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/PerfProducer.o
> > /home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/perf/PerfProducer.cc:19:10: fatal
> > error: lib/LogUtils.h: No such file or directory
> >19 | #include 
> >   |  ^~~~
> > compilation terminated.
> > make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/build.make:76:
> > CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/PerfProducer.o] Error 1
> > make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:85: CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/all] 
> > Error 2
> > make: *** [Makefile:91: all] Error 2
> >  ```
> >
> >  [0] https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar-client-cpp-demo
> >
> >  Thanks,
> >  Hang
> >
> > PengHui Li  于2022年12月5日周一 16:23写道：
> > >
> > > +1 binding
> > >
> > > - Verified the signatures
> > > - Verified the Linux platform follows the documentation [0]
> > >  - RPM
> > >  - DEB
> > >  - APK
> > >
> > > [0] https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar-client-cpp-demo
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Penghui
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 2:06 PM Matteo Merli  
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 binding.
> > > >
> > > > Checked:
> > > >  * Source compiling and tested with perf producer
> > > >  * Signatures
> > > >  * RPM & Deb packages installing
> > > >
> > > >
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Client C++ Release 3.1.0 Candidate 3

[Hang Chen]

Hi Zike, thanks for your great job!

Verified:
 - Verified checksum and signatures
 - Build from source code on Ubuntu 20.04
 - Verified produce and test on DEB followed by [0]

 I found the following issues.

 - When running produce and consume, and the client calls close, it
shows `ConnectError` in the close method
 ```
2022-12-09 03:33:45.288 INFO  [139648501270080] ConsumerImpl:1083 |
[persistent://public/default/basic_e2e_example, sub, 0] Closed
consumer 0
2022-12-09 03:33:45.289 INFO  [139648476091968] ClientConnection:1584
| [127.0.0.1:43644 -> 127.0.0.1:6650] Connection closed with
ConnectError
2022-12-09 03:33:45.289 INFO  [139648476091968] ClientConnection:267 |
[127.0.0.1:43644 -> 127.0.0.1:6650] Destroyed connection
```

 - When build the source code with g++ 11.3.0, it failed with the
following exception
```
/usr/include/c++/11/ostream:750:5: error: no type named 'type' in
'struct std::enable_if'
In file included from /usr/include/gtest/internal/gtest-internal.h:57,
 from /usr/include/gtest/gtest.h:62,
 from
/home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/tests/KeyValueSchemaTest.cc:19:
```

 - When build perf under perf directory, it failed with the following exception.
 ```
 root@5b313881db52:/home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/perf/build# make
[ 25%] Building CXX object CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/PerfProducer.o
/home/apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0/perf/PerfProducer.cc:19:10: fatal
error: lib/LogUtils.h: No such file or directory
   19 | #include 
  |  ^~~~
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/build.make:76:
CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/PerfProducer.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:85: CMakeFiles/perfProducer.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:91: all] Error 2
 ```

 [0] https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar-client-cpp-demo

 Thanks,
 Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年12月5日周一 16:23写道：
>
> +1 binding
>
> - Verified the signatures
> - Verified the Linux platform follows the documentation [0]
>  - RPM
>  - DEB
>  - APK
>
> [0] https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar-client-cpp-demo
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2022 at 2:06 PM Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > +1 binding.
> >
> > Checked:
> >  * Source compiling and tested with perf producer
> >  * Signatures
> >  * RPM & Deb packages installing
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matteo Merli
> > 
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 1, 2022 at 5:57 PM Zike Yang  wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar Client C++,
> > > version 3.1.0.
> > >
> > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/milestone/2?closed=1
> > >
> > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > open
> > > for at least 72 hours ***
> > >
> > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > > convenience.
> > >
> > > Source and binary files:
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-cpp/pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0-candidate-3/
> > >
> > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > >
> > a09cbf9c3e1208545ed9150a4ff6cba20cb29d01a3c8177aa9f17aa2285a080e19a4cd146a73e5bdbfd165562c4e63beb1aef7a3c655dd7fe01a9a92139dd0ac
> > > ./apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.1.0.tar.gz
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > v3.1.0-candidate-3 (f9cca17b5bb90819be78eabf921d60c99cf02a13)
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/releases/tag/v3.1.0-candidate-3
> > >
> > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > >
> > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to compile and
> > test.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Zike Yang
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Enable branch-2.9 force push and frozen branch-2.9

[Hang Chen]

+1 for re-cherry-picking the commits.

Thanks,
Hang

Yubiao Feng  于2022年11月25日周五 13:58写道：
>
> +1 for re-cherry-pick the commits.
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:29 PM 丛搏  wrote:
>
> > Hi, pulsar community,
> >
> > I am sorry for that, there is no commit to execute cherry-pick
> > --continue, resulting in many cherry-pick commit messages not being
> > correct[1]. So re-cherry-pick, now requires enabling branch-2.9 force
> > push and frozen branch-2.9.
> >
> > reset commit 5ed247de3a.
> >
> > now branch-2.9 has checkout a new branch[2]
> >
> > sorry again, I will re-cherry-pick it in these two days
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bo
> >
> > [1]
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/commit/f1882ee4f0367c781144435a0eee93c1e3121fed
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/tree/branch-2.9-backup
> >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Cong Zhao

[Hang Chen]

Congrats!

Best,
Hang

tison  于2022年11月22日周二 13:15写道：
>
> Congrats!
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> Max Xu  于2022年11月22日周二 13:14写道：
>
> > Congratulations! Cong
> >
> > Best,
> > Max Xu
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 12:10 PM Haiting Jiang 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Pulsar has invited
> > > Cong Zhao (https://github.com/coderzc)
> > > to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that he has
> > accepted.
> > >
> > > Being a committer enables easier contribution to the
> > > project since there is no need to go via the patch
> > > submission process. This should enable better productivity.
> > >
> > > Welcome and congratulations, Cong Zhao!
> > >
> > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Cong Zhao onboard!
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Haiting on behalf of the Pulsar PMC
> > >
> >

Re: Releasing current master as Pulsar 2.11.0 ?

[Hang Chen]

If we drop the current branch-2.11 and release based on the master,
why not release 3.0.0 based on the master branch directly according to
the new release plan [1].

If we cut the master branch and release Pulsar 2.11.0, we will wait at
least three months before we cut 3.0.0.


[1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15966

Thanks,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2022年11月14日周一 17:16写道：
>
> I found out that several PRs have been unable to cherry-pick to 2.11 today.
> I agree to cut the new branch based on the master and turn off the
> new/unstable features in branch-2.11.
>
>
>
> Regards
> Tboy
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 1:00 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> > Inline
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Nov 3, 2022, at 6:55 AM, Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
> > >
> > > PengHui,
> > >
> > >> Il giorno mar 1 nov 2022 alle ore 07:51 PengHui Li
> > >>  ha scritto:
> > >>
> > >>> As it is, we already need to discuss EOL for 2.7 and 2.8.
> > >>
> > >> Agree. We should clarify this one.
> > >> I think we can stop to provide new releases for 2.7
> > >> and only security or critical bugs for 2.8 (one more official release)
> > >>
> > >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15966 will make the
> > >> release strategy clear.
> > >>
> > >> LTS -> 36 months (24 + 12)
> > >> Feature release -> 6 months (3+3)
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Penghui
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 2:15 PM Michael Marshall 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I am concerned that we have too many active release branches, and
> > planning
> > >>> to follow 2.11.0 with 3.0.0 soon after feels like it will make that
> > problem
> > >>> worse. As it is, we already need to discuss EOL for 2.7 and 2.8.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Michael
> > >>>
> >  On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:55 PM PengHui Li 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> >  Releasing from the master branch will bring more uncertainty, no?
> >  We have fixed many regressions that were introduced to branch-2.11.
> >  If we cut a new branch-2.11 based on the master branch. Maybe new
> >  regressions
> >  will happen again. This may make us wait another month to have a
> > 2.11.0
> >  release.
> > >
> > > I am not sure.
> > > I don't know if anyone is actively testing the 2.11 branch more than
> > > the master branch.
> > > On my side the (automated) testing that I do with my colleagues on
> > > branch-2.11 is basically the same as for the master branch.
> > >
> > > I believe that if we want to cut a 2.11 release that is not branched
> > > again from the master branch
> > > we really must start the release as soon as BK 4.15.3 is released
> >
> > I understand that Bookkeeper issues have Ben what’s blocking 2.11
> > >
> > > Many people contributed features to the master branch that cannot be
> > > shipped with 2.11 because
> > > they are considered "breaking changes".
> > > But 2.11 was supposed to be released in August, more than 3 months ago.
> >
> > I think we can recognize that our past history has been that there are
> > often 3 or 4 RCs for our 2.x.0 releases.
> >
> > Maybe we should be cherry picking some PRs on master to 2.11 before we
> > start the process? It may or may not save an RC but it will give us time to
> > be realistic about a reasonable cadence from 2.10.x to 2.11.x to 2.12.x …
> > it’s hard to support many versions at once. The CVE announced today took
> > months to be included in all of our current releases from 2.7.5 to 2.10.2.
> > Separation of C++ and Pulsar client releases from Pulsar releases helps
> > here, but it may not with the next security issue.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > 
> >  IMO, we can start Pulsar 3.0 (follow
> >  https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15966)
> >  after 2.11.0 is released instead of waiting for 3 more months.
> > 
> >  For https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3466
> >  I don't think it's a blocker for the Pulsar release for now.
> >  Yes, it is worth investigating more. We also tried a chaos test for
> > that
> >  case.
> >  We haven't reproduced the problem on Pulsar.
> > 
> >  Now, we are just waiting for the new BookKeeper release 4.15.3 since
> > >>> 4.15.2
> >  has regressions [1]
> > 
> >  [1] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/3523
> > 
> >  Thanks,
> >  Penghui
> > 
> >  On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:10 AM Michael Marshall  > >
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > I have not followed the branch-2.11 work closely, but I think it
> > makes
> > > sense to re-create branch-2.11 from the current master.
> > >
> > > We created branch-2.11 almost 3 months ago. Re-creating the branch
> > > will prevent unnecessary delay on new features added over the past 3
> > > months.
> > >
> > > If we follow through with this proposal, we will need to clean up PR
> > > tags and milestones to prevent confusion.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 31, 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-219: Support full scan and trim ledger

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Cong Zhao  于2022年11月7日周一 16:35写道：
>
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Cong
>
> On 2022/11/01 14:28:14 linlin wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'd like to start a vote for the PIP-219: Support full scan and trim ledger
> > (
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/18128)
> >
> > The discussion can be found here:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/wy8sqs2fdmw3kcdfos7t1ztpccfdmv72
> >
> > Best regards.
> >
> > linlin
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Client C++ Release 3.0.0 Candidate 3

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

- Verified checksum and signatures
- Build from source (ubuntu 20.04)
- Run produce and consume with `libpulsar.a`

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年10月25日周二 14:34写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - Verified the signatures
> - Build from the source (osx 12.6)
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 10:53 PM Yunze Xu 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-bindings)
> >
> > * verify checksum and signatures
> > * build from source (Ubuntu 20.04 x86_64)
> > * basic e2e tests with libraries built from source
> > * rpm packages
> >
> > BTW, I've created a repo here [1] to verify the binaries. In future, I
> > will add more examples to verify the release.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/BewareMyPower/pulsar-client-cpp-demo
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yunze
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 5:20 PM Yunze Xu  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Kai,
> > >
> > > Yeah, it's an issue that currently the scripts all use `git` command
> > > to determine the root directory.
> > > I'm not sure if it could be a blocker.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Yunze
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 2:36 PM Kai Wang  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > Environment: M1 macOS 12.6 and Ubuntu 20.04 x86_64
> > > >
> > > > * verify checksum and signatures
> > > > * build from the source
> > > > * run producers and consumers
> > > >
> > > > But when I follow `README.md` guide to starting the standalone broker,
> > I get an error.
> > > >
> > > > ```
> > > > ➜  apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.0.0 ./pulsar-test-service-start.sh
> > > > fatal: not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git
> > > > ```
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2022/10/21 21:29:36 Matteo Merli wrote:
> > > > > This is the third release candidate for Apache Pulsar Client C++,
> > version 3.0.0.
> > > > >
> > > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/milestone/1?closed=1
> > > > >
> > > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will
> > stay open
> > > > > for at least 72 hours ***
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > for
> > > > > convenience.
> > > > >
> > > > > Source and binary files:
> > > > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-cpp-3.0.0-candidate-3/
> > > > >
> > > > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > > > >
> > 4e68aed2018c40885124db8aa2c31303da63e2ecf9655807cd1eb2f8c802bff00abc322f08b2a58defc4ec089f9a74d567523307067cd254ef1d61f764fb0b3b
> > > > >  ./apache-pulsar-client-cpp-3.0.0.tar.gz
> > > > >
> > > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > > v3.0.0-candidate-3 (f70aa89d1ac0c012d0dc472e1c53462834dfb517)
> > > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp/releases/tag/v3.0.0-candidate-3
> > > > >
> > > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys you use to sign the release:
> > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > > > >
> > > > > Please download the source package, and follow the README to compile
> > and test.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matteo Merli
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> >

[ANNOUNCE] Haiting Jiang as a new PMC member in Apache Pulsar

[Hang Chen]

Hi all,

The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Haiting Jiang
(https://github.com/Jason918) as a member of the PMC and we are
pleased to announce that he has accepted.

He is very active in the community on GitHub.

Welcome Haiting to the Apache Pulsar PMC

Best Regards,
Hang Chen on behalf of the Pulsar PMC

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Client Go Release 0.9.0 Candidate 2

[Hang Chen]

+1(binding)
- Check sha 512 for the source code
- Build from the source code
- Run produce and consume

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年9月29日周四 22:06写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - build from the source code
> - test the produce and consume
>
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 2:43 PM Guangning E  wrote:
>
> > +1(non-binding)
> > - Check sha 512 value for source code
> > - Check go build producer example
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Guangning
> >
> > r...@apache.org  于2022年9月29日周四 14:35写道：
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version 0.9.0,
> > > as follows:
> > > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> > >
> > > This is the second release candidate for Apache Pulsar Go client,
> > > version 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/milestone/10?closed=1
> > >
> > > Pulsar Client Go's KEYS file contains PGP keys we used to sign this
> > > release:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> > >
> > > Please download these packages and review this release candidate:
> > > - Review release notes
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/pull/804
> > > - Download the source package (verify shasum, and asc) and follow the
> > > README.md to build and run the pulsar-client-go.
> > >
> > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> > > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> > >
> > > Source file:
> > >
> > >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-client-go-0.9.0-candidate-2/
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > v0.9.0
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-go/releases/tag/v0.9.0-candidate-2
> > >
> > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > >
> > >
> > 9731d6a0615288e77feb4b73fedbbdf6d275ebefeee3cee5fc4e849f38789863f0532c7e8b93eb1e601bd98f9bb21d50a714fcf87fac9987a745a052bbe23ca3
> > >  apache-pulsar-client-go-0.9.0-candidate-2-src.tar.gz
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Xiaolong Ran
> > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Pulsar Client C++ 3.0.0

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Zike Yang  于2022年10月8日周六 09:19写道：
>
> +1
>
> Thanks,
> Zike Yang
>
> On Sat, Oct 8, 2022 at 9:17 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Regards,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 11:34 PM tison  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 cool!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > >
> > > Baodi Shi  于2022年10月7日周五 23:31写道：
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Baodi Shi
> > > >
> > > > > 在 2022年10月7日，22:00，Max Xu  写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > > Thanks, Matteo. It's a great work!
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Max Xu
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 2:07 AM Matteo Merli 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> We have moved the C++ client to its own separate repo
> > > > >> (https://github.com/apache/pulsar-client-cpp) as part of PIP-209.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There are several new features and fixes in the main branch that it
> > > > >> would be good to get released, as well to get the new release process
> > > > >> all flushed out.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Matteo
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Matteo Merli
> > > > >> 
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-196 Segmented transaction buffer snapshot

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

guo jiwei  于2022年9月9日周五 18:17写道：
>
> +1(binding)
>
> Great work !
>
> Regards
> Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:10 AM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > +1(binding)
> >
> >  I have done the review on gdoc
> > And please also update the github issue(PIP).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 9:31 AM 丛搏  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Xiangying
> > > +1(non-binding)
> > >
> > > This PIP overall LGTM! It solves the problem of snapshots not being
> > > able to scale.
> > > We can make some optimizations later :
> > > 1. Merge transaction snapshot segments to reduce the number of
> > > segments and the index's size.
> > > 2. Add snapshot segments to memory as TB requires reducing memory
> > overhead.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > > Bo
> > >
> > > Xiangying Meng  于2022年9月8日周四 22:17写道：
> > > >
> > > > Hi, community
> > > > This proposal has some updates. The latest version of the proposal can
> > be
> > > > found here
> > > > <
> > >
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hBk2nGcj0Os-ULi2q404gCoxIsPleGY8p5H1hqWD5kI/edit#
> > > >
> > > > .
> > > > Feel free to comment on this doc.
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Xiangying
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 4:55 PM Xiangying Meng 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi, community
> > > > > I,d like to start a vote for the PIP-196
> > > > >  Segmented
> > transaction
> > > > > buffer snapshot.
> > > > > And the discussion can be found here
> > > > > .
> > > > >
> > > > > Sincerely,
> > > > > Xiangying
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >

Re: Enable "Update branch" Github button in pull requests

[Hang Chen]

Hi Nicolo,
 Thanks for your proposal. After Pulsar enabled the `update
branch` bottom, I found a lot of Prs are blocked by running unit tests
due to a lot of unit tests rerun by the `update branch` action. The
update branch action will cause the CI resource busy and waste a lot
of resources if contributors or committers click the `update branch`
bottom many times for each PR. I think we need to add some
restrictions for the `update branch` bottom. Do you have any ideas?

Thanks,
Hang

Qiang Huang  于2022年8月24日周三 19:50写道：
>
> +1. It can help a lot.
>
> Zixuan Liu  于2022年8月22日周一 10:38写道：
>
> > +1
> >
> > Best,
> > Zixuan
> >
> > On 2022/07/12 16:06:43 Nicolò Boschi wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'd like to propose to enable the Github button "update branch" in the
> > pull
> > > requests.
> > >
> > > The main reason is that it helps when you want to rebase your pull to the
> > > current master.
> > > For instance today a fix for a failing job in the CI has been committed
> > and
> > > you were forced to close/reopen the pull or manual rebase your branch.
> > With
> > > this button is much easier and it will retrigger the CI as well.
> > >
> > > This is the guide to enable it:
> > >
> > https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes-to-your-work-with-pull-requests/keeping-your-pull-request-in-sync-with-the-base-branch
> > >
> > > This is an example where I activated the button in my own Pulsar fork:
> > > https://github.com/nicoloboschi/pulsar/pull/4
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nicolò Boschi
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> BR,
> Qiang Huang

Re: [Vote] PIP-192 New Pulsar Broker Load Balancer

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Awesome job!

Thanks,
Hang

Heesung Sohn  于2022年8月24日周三 05:29写道：
>
> Hi, Pulsar dev community,
>
> This vote has been open for 23 days, and we are closing this vote today as
> this PIP received three binding +1s.
>
> We are moving forward and starting implementation -- there will be a series
> of PRs and sub-PIPs(if further design discussions are required).
>
> Thank you,
> Heesung
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 4:56 AM guo jiwei  wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Regards
> > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 3:12 PM Qiang Huang 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Kai Wang  于2022年8月5日周五 10:18写道：
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Kai
> > > >
> > > > Heesung Sohn  于2022年8月2日周二
> > > 08:50写道：
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Pulsar Community,
> > > > >
> > > > > Please review and vote on this PIP.
> > > > >
> > > > > PIP link: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16691
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > -Heesung
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > BR,
> > > Qiang Huang
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-184: Topic specific consumer priorityLevel

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2022年7月29日周五 15:01写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Enrico
>
> Il Ven 29 Lug 2022, 07:13 PengHui Li  ha scritto:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Penghui
> > On Jul 25, 2022, 13:42 +0800, mattison chao ,
> > wrote:
> > > +1(non-binding)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Mattison
> > >
> > > On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 at 13:19, guo jiwei  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:54 AM PengHui Li 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Penghui
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:15 AM Zike Yang  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 3:58 PM Dave Maughan
> > > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Pulsar Community
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to start a VOTE on "PIP-184: Topic specific consumer
> > > > > > > priorityLevel".
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The proposal can be read at
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16481
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and the discussion thread is available at
> > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/5zs4gd3r0rtzz16nv62o8ntygg01qjhq
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Dave
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] Restart Release Pulsar 2.7.5

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2022年7月26日周二 19:21写道：
>
> +1
>
> thank you
>
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno mar 26 lug 2022 alle ore 13:19 Haiting Jiang
>  ha scritto:
> >
> > Hello Pulsar Community,
> >
> > Previously in early February, we had a discussion about 2.7.5 release in 
> > [1].
> > But unfortunately, there seems to be a test regression in Candidate 1 and 
> > the
> > release process is blocked since [2]. I would like to pick up the work and
> > volunteer to be the release manager.
> >
> > Here [3] you can find the list of 52 commits to branch-2.7 since the 2.7.4
> > release. The commits number is 41 more than RC1. Since 2.7.5 should be the
> > last release of branch 2.7, I plan to include all existing commit this time.
> > After that branch 2.7 should not accept any more commits.
> >
> > There are 4 closed PRs targeting 2.7.5 that have not yet been cherry-picked
> > [4]. I'll follow up on these PRs and solve the test regression issue and 
> > start
> > preparing branch-2.7 RC2 for the release.
> >
> > BR,
> > Haiting Jiang
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/wxl5z67nnzv05r5vldjq3c6sm7fxnrcc
> > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/yvrmwldtzbo9lbs0jqjfj31lxtd792jq
> > [3] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/compare/v2.7.4...branch-2.7
> > [4] 
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.7.5+-label%3Acherry-picked%2Fbranch-2.7

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 2

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

- Checked the checksum and license
- Build from source code with JDK 11
- Run standalone, and run pulsar-perf produce/consume
- Verified pulsar-io-lakehouse connector

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年7月8日周五 23:01写道：
>
> +1 binding
>
> - checked the signature
> - run standalone and test produce/consume
> - verified function and stateful function
> - verified the Cassandra connector
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 8:16 PM Nicolò Boschi  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Checks:
> > - Checksum and signatures
> > - Apache Rat check passes
> > - Compile from source w JDK11
> > - Build docker image from source
> > - Run Pulsar standalone and produce-consume from CLI
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > Nicolò Boschi
> >
> >
> > Il giorno ven 8 lug 2022 alle ore 13:47 Qiang Huang <
> > qiang.huang1...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Enrico Olivelli  于2022年7月8日周五 19:42写道：
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > - built from sources, with JDK11, run a couple of smoke tests
> > > > - verified RAT
> > > > - verified checksums and signatures
> > > > - run some JMS tests using Transactions (the JMS library bundles
> > > > 2.10.x Java client)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for driving the release!
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > > Il giorno mer 6 lug 2022 alle ore 10:26 mattison chao
> > > >  ha scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the second release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version
> > 2.9.3.
> > > > >
> > > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will
> > stay
> > > > open
> > > > > for at least 72 hours ***
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided
> > > for
> > > > > convenience.
> > > > >
> > > > > Source and binary files:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.3-candidate-2/
> > > > >
> > > > > SHA-512 checksums:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > 291eb3f9da234cf38fcd02de781def9a9354025bb4f98c78b160935a6a9c6721cc8280d80b93049656ee5a20e36ddc5d3446b7b034405c07d447833ff65e
> > > > ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-bin.tar.gz
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > d57fa3c8eae1f3ba60422a56288c99a472a671295e41573c884a9d9a71b5fcf622782732e9cfd5128e1b92304b3812cc877675384ac0dbc78109d7efb23681f4
> > > > ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-src.tar.gz
> > > > >
> > > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1163/
> > > > >
> > > > > The tag to be voted upon:
> > > > > v2.9.3-candidate-2 (dd9a5f1f91651b634600f66c53dcc6ad855fb669)
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.3-candidate-2
> > > > >
> > > > > The docker images:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/248117318/mattison/pulsar/2.9.3-rc-2/images/sha256-a7ac6d5ffb2d77102ca6633313c9d0265c1c89c8b0fe859023fbaf3e0d0a7910?context=repo
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://hub.docker.com/layers/247907545/mattison/pulsar-all/2.9.3-rc-2/images/sha256-00e6a886a9285107027afb4c3218c9340efb96627100ff2f1c95d1177bd8dbbe?context=repo
> > > > >
> > > > > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS <
> > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS>
> > > > >
> > > > > Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
> > > > > Validation[1]
> > > > > to validate the release
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
> > > <
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > BR,
> > > Qiang Huang
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-160 Make transactions work more efficiently by aggregation operation for transaction log and pending ack store

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Re: [VOTE] PIP-181: Pulsar Shell

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Haiting Jiang  于2022年7月5日周二 14:26写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Haiting
>
> On 2022/07/04 14:45:28 Nicolò Boschi wrote:
> > Dear Community,
> >
> > I would like to start a VOTE on "PIP-181: Pulsar Shell"
> >
> > The proposal can be read at [0] and the discussion thread is available at
> > [1].
> > Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
> >
> > [0] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16250
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/5sdy2yl2djsznhpmf9c67hrmqpvgz0ob
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nicolò Boschi
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-181: Pulsar Shell

[Hang Chen]

+1 Great work!

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年7月4日周一 19:36写道：
>
> + 1
>
> Penghui
> On Jul 4, 2022, 18:22 +0800, Dezhi Liu , wrote:
> > +1, Great Job.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dezhi
> >
> > On 2022/06/28 08:06:01 Nicolò Boschi wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I opened a new PIP about Pulsar CLI tools.
> > > Looking forward to seeing comments and suggestions.
> > >
> > > PIP: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16250
> > >
> > > I posted a short video that shows how the new tool will work:
> > > https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23314389/176125261-35e123a1-1826-4553-b912-28d00914c0e4.mp4
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ## Motivation
> > >
> > > Currently Pulsar comes with a couple of utility scripts with the goal of
> > > managing an existing cluster, test behaviours and verify performances:
> > > these tools are available as SH script inside the `bin` directory.
> > > The `pulsar-admin` is the CLI tool supposed to help users and operators to
> > > configure the system, operate over policies, install functions and much
> > > else.
> > >
> > > This proposal basically aims to solve two different problems:
> > >
> > > 1. `pulsar-admin` is terribly slow. Every time the script is triggered, a
> > > new JVM process is spawned. The JVM process creation is heavy and most of
> > > the time is spent by the JVM initialization process. A very common use 
> > > case
> > > for cluster operators is to create scripts with several commands with the
> > > goal of initialize the cluster, initialize a specific tenant (namespaces,
> > > topics, policies, functions..); in this case, one JVM is initialized for
> > > each scripts leads to waste of time and resources.
> > >
> > > 2. User experience. The current design of the Pulsar CLIs can be improved.
> > > There are a couple of aspects that may be annoying for a user and can
> > > discourage a user to use Pulsar.
> > > 1. Poking around available commands and options in a CLI tool
> > > (`pulsar-admin` for instance, but it's the same for `pulsar-perf` and
> > > `pulsar-client`) is slow and hard. In order to discover commands and
> > > options you need to use `-h` option and, since the performance issue
> > > pointed at 1., it can be annoying and time-consuming. Autocomplete feature
> > > could be a real game-changer in this context.
> > > 2. Different CLI tools. There are a couple of different shell scripts.
> > > They have different goals and it's okay to keep them separated. However,
> > > they raise a barrier for a non Pulsar expert that doesn't have a 
> > > convenient
> > > entry-point.
> > >
> > > ## Goal
> > >
> > > Address all the issues in the previous section with a single solution.
> > >
> > > ## API Changes
> > >
> > > A new shell script `bin/pulsar-shell` will be introduced. `bin/pulsar
> > > shell` could be a valid alternative but it's not findable for a newbie 
> > > user
> > > since no direct file exists.
> > >
> > > ## Implementation
> > >
> > > ### Concepts
> > > The new script `pulsar-shell` will differ from the existing for the
> > > following reasons:
> > >
> > > 1. It's a shell. When you start it, it will wait for commands to be
> > > executed. After the command has been executed, despite its result, the
> > > shell session will not be destroyed and it will wait for another command.
> > > 2. Unifies all the CLI scripts. In `pulsar-shell` you'll be able to run 
> > > all
> > > the existing CLI commands. This will be done in a way that when a new
> > > command/option is added, the pulsar-shell will be updated accordingly.
> > > 3. It comes with sophisticated autocompletion and command history to 
> > > highly
> > > improve the UX.
> > > 4. Performance. Since JVM is initiated once, it will gain on performance
> > > thanks to the JVM warmup and internal libraries bootstraps.
> > > 5. It will accept a file or a list of commands (parameter and stdin) to
> > > start a shell, run the commands and close the shell. We'll call it the
> > > `non-interactive` mode and it will ease the cluster operations 
> > > automations.
> > >
> > > Note that existing tools will not be removed/changed.
> > >
> > > ### Implementation
> > >
> > > The shell implementation will be developed in Java, using a well-known
> > > library called [JLine 3](https://github.com/jline/jline3) for the shell
> > > support.
> > > There will be a new main class that will extends the existing class tools
> > > (e.g. `PulsarAdminTool`)
> > >
> > >  Configuration
> > > The configuration file taken by default will be `client.conf`, like 
> > > current
> > > CLI tools. The env setup will be exactly the same as for `pulsar-admin` 
> > > and
> > > `pulsar-client`.
> > >
> > >  Autocompletion
> > > JLine3 has great support for autocompletion. The shell java class will
> > > translate current `JCommander` tools to the JLine3 completion API. This
> > > will ensure that all APIs will be up-to-date and covered.
> > >
> > >  History
> > > JLine3 has built-in support for history, both in-memory and 

Re: [VOTE] [PIP-179] Support the admin API to check unknown request parameters

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Lan Liang  于2022年7月1日周五 18:03写道：
>
> +1,NB
>
>
> - lan.liang
>  Replied Message 
> | From | Enrico Olivelli |
> | Date | 6/30/2022 18:35 |
> | To | Dev |
> | Subject | Re: [VOTE] [PIP-179] Support the admin API to check unknown 
> request parameters |
> +1 (binding)
>
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno gio 30 giu 2022 alle ore 08:57 Zike Yang  ha 
> scritto:
>
> +1
>
> Zike Yang
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 12:38 PM mattison chao 
> wrote:
>
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Mattison
>
> On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 at 12:35, Michael Marshall 
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> - Michael
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 9:29 PM Qiang Huang 
> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Yubiao Feng  于2022年6月30日周四
> 00:40写道：
>
> Hi Pulsar Community
>
> I would like to start a VOTE on "Support the admin API to check
> unknown
> request parameters" (PIP-179).
>
> The proposal can be read at
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/16135
>
> and the discussion thread is available at
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/m8vkxl46njm7sh0r1mqsn25jggq9v8kb
>
> Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
>
> Thanks
> Yubiao Feng
>
>
>
> --
> BR,
> Qiang Huang
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1

[Hang Chen]

Thanks for Enrico's help, after importing the following dependency, it
works for me now.
```

org.apache.pulsar
pulsar
${pulsar.version}
import
pom


```

+1 (binding)

- Build from source code, and run the license check
- Import the published jar into my project, and works for me
- Run pulsar-perf produce and consumer on the standalone cluster
- Run pulsar-io-lakehouse connector on the standalone cluster

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2022年6月28日周二 15:55写道：
>
> Hang,
>
> Il giorno lun 27 giu 2022 alle ore 03:55 Hang Chen
>  ha scritto:
> >
> > Hi Penghui,
> >  Thanks for your great work!
> >
> > I found two problems with this candidate, I'm not sure whether it will
> > block this release.
> >   - There are some CVEs in this candidate. Please refer to:
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/runs/6854904384?check_suite_focus=true
> >   - When I import `pulsar-broker` and `managed-ledger` into my
> > project, I found the project build failed with the following
> > exceptions.
>
> This is not a regression of 2.10.1, we should not change it.
> The solution is to import the Pulsar "BOM" (Bills of Materials) like
> we do in Pulsar Adapters
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar-adapters/blob/master/pom.xml#L163
>
> Enrico
>
> >
> > ```
> > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project test_pulsar_lib: Could not
> > resolve dependencies for project
> > org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Failed to collect
> > dependencies for org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Could
> > not resolve version conflict among
> > [org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
> > org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.42.1,
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
> > org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-testing:jar:1.42.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.42.1,1.42.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-grpclb:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-netty:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-rls:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-services:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.45.1,
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-netty-shaded:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1] ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
> > org.apache.pulsar:managed-ledger:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-metadata:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.etcd:jetcd-core:jar:0.5.11 -> io.etcd:jetcd-common:jar:0.5.11 ->
> > io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.41.0,
> > org.apache.pulsar:managed-ledger:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-metadata:jar:2.10.1 ->
> > io.etcd:jetcd-core:jar:0.5.11 -> io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.41.0] ->
> > [Help 1]
> >
> > ```
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hang
> >
> > PengHui Li  于2022年6月27日周一 08:51写道：
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Thanks for all your verification for 2.10.1
> > >
> > > We currently have 2 (+1) bindings and 5 (+1) non-bind

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.9.3 Candidate 1

[Hang Chen]

Hi Mattison,
Thanks for your great work!

I found one problem with this candidate.
- When I import `pulsar-broker` and `managed-ledger` into my
project, I found the project build failed with the following
exceptions.

```
[ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project test_pulsar_lib: Could not
resolve dependencies for project
org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Failed to collect
dependencies for org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Could
not resolve version conflict among
[org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.42.1,
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
io.grpc:grpc-testing:jar:1.42.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.42.1,1.42.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-grpclb:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-netty:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-rls:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-services:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.45.1,
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.9.3 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.9.3 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-netty-shaded:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1] ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1]] -> [Help 1]
```

There is a PR: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/16109 removed
pulsar-zookeeper-utils, which fixes this issue. But in branch 2.9, we
still need this module, we can not cherry-pick this pr into
branch-2.9. We can exclude the `io.grpc:grpc-core` in one dependency
to fix this issue.

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年6月27日周一 09:51写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> - verify gpg signatures
> - run standalone
> - pub/sub with pulsar-perf
> - verify connector (Cassandra)
> - verify stateful function
> - build image and test internally for the integration tests (all the tests
> get passed)
>
> @mattison It's better to upload the image under your org first so that we
> can verify the image
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 9:24 AM mattison chao 
> wrote:
>
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar, version 2.9.3.
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > open
> > for at least 72 hours ***
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > convenience.
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-2.9.3-candidate-1/
> >
> > SHA-512 checksums:
> >
> >
> > cbc9efbb6b25704e306442b1f45ab7e309fb7c0476c380997b4541b66e4709baeff7c67107a5c68faefe40a32a559755df54a732b21b5c689612307e688f1bcb
> >  ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-bin.tar.gz
> >
> >
> > 35795b824d0775ffcd426ff5b86858148fd55c3d465edc52f23aa938daefcc50dbffa962f26e03e6fa3a77a47c3b5f19f98e1a1fbd5a98f6fe6d800223a8ead8
> >  ./apache-pulsar-2.9.3-src.tar.gz
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachepulsar-1158/
> >
> > The tag to be voted upon:
> > v2.9.3-candidate-1 (dd9a5f1f91651b634600f66c53dcc6ad855fb669)
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/releases/tag/v2.9.3-candidate-1
> >
> > Pulsar's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS
> >
> > Please download the source package, and follow the Release Candidate
> > Validation[1]
> > to validate the release
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/Release-Candidate-Validation
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1

[Hang Chen]

Hi Penghui,
 Thanks for your great work!

I found two problems with this candidate, I'm not sure whether it will
block this release.
  - There are some CVEs in this candidate. Please refer to:
https://github.com/apache/pulsar/runs/6854904384?check_suite_focus=true
  - When I import `pulsar-broker` and `managed-ledger` into my
project, I found the project build failed with the following
exceptions.

```
[ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project test_pulsar_lib: Could not
resolve dependencies for project
org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Failed to collect
dependencies for org.example:test_pulsar_lib:jar:1.0-SNAPSHOT: Could
not resolve version conflict among
[org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.42.1,
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-server:jar:4.14.5 ->
org.apache.bookkeeper:stream-storage-java-client:jar:4.14.5 ->
io.grpc:grpc-testing:jar:1.42.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.42.1,1.42.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-grpclb:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-netty:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-rls:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-services:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.45.1,
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-broker:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-zookeeper-utils:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-all:jar:1.45.1 -> io.grpc:grpc-xds:jar:1.45.1 ->
io.grpc:grpc-netty-shaded:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1] ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:[1.45.1,1.45.1],
org.apache.pulsar:managed-ledger:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-metadata:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.etcd:jetcd-core:jar:0.5.11 -> io.etcd:jetcd-common:jar:0.5.11 ->
io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.41.0,
org.apache.pulsar:managed-ledger:jar:2.10.1 ->
org.apache.pulsar:pulsar-metadata:jar:2.10.1 ->
io.etcd:jetcd-core:jar:0.5.11 -> io.grpc:grpc-core:jar:1.41.0] ->
[Help 1]

```

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年6月27日周一 08:51写道：
>
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for all your verification for 2.10.1
>
> We currently have 2 (+1) bindings and 5 (+1) non-bindings.
> We need one more (+1) binding to unblock the 2.10.1 release.
> Please help validate.
>
> Thanks,
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 12:43 PM Shusuke Tsuda 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > - verified checksums and signatures
> > - build from source
> > - verified pub/sub and java functions
> > - verified stateful functions
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shusuke Tsuda
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: PengHui Li 
> > Sent: Monday, June 13, 2022 8:43 PM
> > To: Dev 
> > Subject: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 2.10.1 Candidate 1
> >
> > This is the first release candidate for Apache Pulsar 2.10.1
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.10.1+
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote on this release. This vote will stay
> > open for at least 72 hours ***
> >
> > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for
> > convenience.
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> >
> > https://jpn01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fpulsar%2Fpulsar-2.10.1-candidate-1%2Fdata=05%7C01%7Cshustsud%40yahoo-corp.jp%7C5ddcaa29fc224b6f09e608da4d31e6a8%7Ca208d369cd4e4f87b11998eaf31df2c3%7C1%7C0%7C637907173959452192%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7Csdata=MlMhzU4P7GzFXx%2BNQ9DYh09Z4%2BJWzqWe%2BXbhO5pOGBo%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > SHA-512 checksums:
> >
> >
> > 87045067cf123574b2b7d578f020efd177b0d9ff12a75d9f738e135cde35a034000c03e21cc8a264a6ef9e2b1df2c4493ffa3b9170b0f368d7424f1160df38cb
> >  ./apache-pulsar-2.10.1-bin.tar.gz
> >
> >
> > 

Re: [VOTE] PIP-165: Auto release client useless connections

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Zike Yang  于2022年6月15日周三 10:31写道：
>
> +1
>
>
> Zike Yang
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 10:28 AM Haiting Jiang 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Haiting
> >
> > On 2022/06/14 10:28:22 Xiangying Meng wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 3:52 PM Gavin Gao 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2022/06/01 07:11:51 Yubiao Feng wrote:
> > > > > Hi Pulsar Community:
> > > > >
> > > > > There were some mistakes in the last email, so I have corrected them.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to start a VOTE on "Auto release client useless
> > connections"
> > > > > (PIP-165).
> > > > >
> > > > > Proposal Link: [PIP-165] Auto release client useless connections ·
> > Issue
> > > > > #15516 · apache/pulsar (github.com)
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Discuss Link: [DISCUSS] [PIP-165] Auto release client useless
> > > > > connections-Apache Mail Archives
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
> > > > > Thanks, Yubiao Feng
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 2:40 PM Yubiao Feng <
> > yubiao.f...@streamnative.io>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > [VOTE] PIP-165: Auto release client useless connectionsHi Pulsar
> > > > > > Community, I would like to start a VOTE on "Auto release client
> > useless
> > > > > > connections" (PIP-165). The proposal can be read at
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15516
> > > > > >  and the discussion
> > > > thead
> > > > > > is available at
> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/t6h98qs2coc56z06tw38hdlljl67ft4n
> > > > > >   Voting will stay open for at least 48h. Thanks, Yubiao Feng
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-166: Function add MANUAL delivery semantics

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Baodi Shi  于2022年6月8日周三 22:23写道：
>
> Hi, Enrico.
>
> Thank review, I changed it.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Baodi Shi
>
> > On Jun 8, 2022, at 11:3828, PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > I have left one last minute comment, can you please take a look ? then
> > I will post my +1
>

Re: [DISCUSS] PIP-174: Provide new implementation for broker dispatch cache

[Hang Chen]

+1 Great idea!

Thanks,
Hang

Lari Hotari  于2022年6月8日周三 03:32写道：
>
> This is a very useful proposal. LGTM
>
> -Lari
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 3:48 AM Matteo Merli  wrote:
>
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15954
> >
> > WIP can be seen at: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/15955
> >
> > ---
> >
> >
> > ## Motivation
> >
> > The current implementation of the read cache in the Pulsar broker has
> > largely
> > remained unchanged for a long time, except for a few minor tweaks.
> >
> > While the implementation is stable and reasonably efficient for
> > typical workloads,
> > the overhead required for managing the cache evictions in a broker
> > that is running
> > many topics can be pretty high in terms of extra CPU utilization and on
> > the JVM
> > garbage collection to track an increased number of medium-lived objects.
> >
> > The goal is to provide an alternative implementation that can adapt better
> > to
> > a wider variety of operating conditions.
> >
> > ### Current implementation details
> >
> > The broker cache is implemented as part of the `ManagedLedger` component,
> > which sits in the Pulsar broker and provides a higher level of
> > abstraction of top
> > of BookKeeper.
> >
> > Each topic (and managed-ledger) has its own private cache space. This
> > cache is implemented
> > as a `ConcurrentSkipList` sorted map that maps `(ledgerId, entryId) ->
> > payload`. The payload
> > is a `ByteBuf` reference that can either be a slice of a `ByteBuf` that we
> > got
> > when reading from a socket, or it can be a copied buffer.
> >
> > Each topic cache is allowed to use the full broker max cache size before an
> > eviction is triggered. The total cache size is effectively a resource
> > shared across all
> > the topics, where a topic can use a more prominent portion of it if it
> > "asks for more".
> >
> > When the eviction happens, we need to do an expensive ranking of all
> > the caches in the broker
> > and do an eviction in a proportional way to the currently used space
> > for each of them.
> >
> > The bigger problem is represented by the `ConcurrentSkipList` and the
> > `ByteBuf` objects
> > that need to be tracked. The skip list is essentially like a "tree"
> > structure and needs to
> > maintain Java objects for each entry in the cache. We also need to
> > potentially have
> > a huge number of ByteBuf objects.
> >
> > A cache workload is typically the worst-case scenario for each garbage
> > collector implementation because it involves creating objects, storing
> > them for some amount of
> > time and then throwing them away. During that time, the GC would have
> > already tenured these
> > objects and copy them into an "old generation" space, and sometime
> > later, a costly compaction
> > of that memory would have to be performed.
> >
> > To mitigate the effect of the cache workload on the GC, we're being
> > very aggressive in
> > purging the cache by triggering time-based eviction. By putting a max
> > TTL on the elements in
> > the cache, we can avoid keeping the objects around for too long to be
> > a problem for the GC.
> >
> > The reverse side of this is that we're artificially reducing the cache
> > capacity to a very
> > short time frame, reducing the cache usefulness.
> >
> > The other problem is the CPU cost involved in doing these frequent
> > evictions, which can
> > be very high when there are 10s of thousands of topics in a broker.
> >
> >
> > ## Proposed changes
> >
> > Instead of dealing with individual caches for each topic, let's adopt
> > a model where
> > there is a single cache space for the broker.
> >
> > This cache is broken into N segments which act as a circular buffer.
> > Whenever a segment
> > is full, we start writing into the next one, and when we reach the
> > last one, we will
> > restart recycling the first segment.
> >
> > Each segment is composed of a buffer, an offset, and a hashmap which maps
> > `(ledgerId, entryId) -> offset`.
> >
> > This model has been working very well for the BookKeeper `ReadCache`:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/blob/master/bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/bookie/storage/ldb/ReadCache.java
> >
> > There are two main advantages to this approach:
> >
> >  1. Entries are copied into the cache buffer (in direct memory), and
> > we don't need to keep any
> > long-lived Java objects around
> >  2. The eviction becomes a completely trivial operation, buffers are
> > just rotated and
> > overwritten. We don't need to do any per-topic task or keep track
> > of utilization.
> >
> > ### API changes
> >
> > No user-facing API changes are required.
> >
> > ### New configuration options
> >
> > The existing cache implementation will not be removed at this point. Users
> > will
> > be able to configure the old implementation in `broker.conf`.
> >
> > This option will be helpful in case of performance regressions would be
> > seen for
> > some use cases with the new cache 

[ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Dezhi Liu

[Hang Chen]

The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Pulsar has invited
Dezhi Liu (https://github.com/liudezhi2098) to become a committer and
we are pleased to announce that he has accepted.

Dezhi Liu (with Github id liudezhi2098) contributed many improvements
and bug fixes to Pulsar.

Being a committer enables easier contribution to the project since
there is no need to go via the patch submission process. This should
enable better productivity.

Welcome and Congratulations, Dezhi Liu!

Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Dezhi Liu onboard!

Best Regards,
Hang Chen on behalf of the Pulsar PMC

Re: [VOTE] PIP-168: Support zero-copy of NIC to NIC on Proxy

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Neng Lu  于2022年6月1日周三 05:44写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 6:21 AM Haiting Jiang 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Haiting
> >
> > On 2022/05/26 13:40:30 zhaocong wrote:
> > > Hi Pulsar Community,
> > >
> > >
> > > I would like to start a VOTE on "Support zero-copy of NIC to NIC on
> > Proxy"
> > > (PIP-168).
> > >
> > >
> > > The proposal can be read at
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15631
> > >
> > > and the discussion thead is available at
> > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjys9tvbd5hy28mbkbcq7wkqfldycn7v
> > >
> > >
> > > Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Cong Zhao
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Neng

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.9.3 release

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Dave Fisher  于2022年5月25日周三 04:18写道：
>
> There are some PRs that are coming in that must be included.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
>
> > On May 23, 2022, at 4:29 AM, PengHui Li  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks
> > Penghui
> >
> > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 3:31 PM mattison chao 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hello, Pulsar community:
> >>
> >> I'd like to propose to release Apache Pulsar 2.9.3
> >>
> >> Currently, we have 192 commits [0] and there are many transaction
> >> fixes, security fixes.
> >>
> >> And there are 22 open PRs [1], I will follow them to make sure that
> >> the important fixes could be contained in 2.9.3
> >>
> >> If you have any important fixes or any questions,
> >> please reply to this email, we will evaluate whether to
> >> include it in 2.9.3
> >>
> >> [0]
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
> >> [1]
> >>
> >> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.9.3+
> >>
> >> Best Regards
> >> Mattison
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Pulsar 2.10.1 release

[Hang Chen]

+1

There are a lot of transaction fixes.

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年5月21日周六 13:06写道：
>
> Hello, Pulsar community:
>
> I'd like to propose to release Apache Pulsar 2.10.1
>
> Currently, we have 190 commits [0] and there are many transaction
> fixes, security fixes.
>
> And there are 22 open PRs [1], I will follow them to make sure that
> the important fixes could be contained in 2.10.1
>
> If you have any important fixes or any questions,
> please reply to this email, we will evaluate whether to
> include it in 2.10.1
>
> [0]
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Amerged+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.10.1+
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3Arelease%2F2.10.1+
>
> Best Regards
> Penghui

Re: [VOTE] PIP-157: Bucketing topic metadata to allow more topics per namespace

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

mattison chao  于2022年5月18日周三 16:44写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Mattison
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2022 at 15:20, Enrico Olivelli  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> > Il giorno mer 18 mag 2022 alle ore 08:54 Matteo Merli
> >  ha scritto:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matteo Merli
> > > 
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 6:40 PM Matteo Merli 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Lari & Enrico, the discussion thread was out for 11 days and there
> > > > were 2 positive feedbacks.
> > > > I don't think this qualifies as "too early for a vote" and it would
> > > > have been better if the discussion happened then.
> > > >
> > > > As for the comments in the other thread, I think there are only a
> > > > couple of misconceptions on the proposal itself, as they are not
> > > > actual problems (eg: managed ledger is not affected at all by this
> > > > proposal, as the naming happens on top of it).
> > > >
> > > > Some parts can be clarified (as it is always the case), though I don't
> > > > think it's a good idea to stop a vote at this point.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Matteo
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matteo Merli
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 3:31 AM Lari Hotari  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > -1. It's too early to start a vote. Let's first have discussions.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Lari
> > > > >
> > > > > ma 2. toukok. 2022 klo 9.50 Andras Beni  > .invalid>
> > > > > kirjoitti:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Pulsar Community,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to start a VOTE on "Bucketing topic metadata to allow
> > more
> > > > > > topics per namespace" (PIP-157).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The proposal can be read at
> > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15254
> > > > > > and the discussion thead is available at
> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zx6s7hyrl2vy7nhdl79wh6gn88kxpd6k.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Voting will stay open for at least 48h.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Andras
> > > > > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Manager Release 0.3.0 Candidate 3

[Hang Chen]

+1(binding)
- Validate checksum
- Deploy pulsar-manager service and add pulsar cluster
- Create tenants, namespace and topics, delete topics.

Thanks,
Hang

Guangning E  于2022年5月12日周四 20:39写道：
>
> +1(non-binding)
> Validate checksum
> Start pulsar-manager service
> Create tenant and topic
>
> Thanks,
> Guangning
>
> Li Li  于2022年5月10日周二 14:14写道：
>
> > Hi everyone,
> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version 0.3.0,
> > as follows:
> > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
> >
> > The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
> > * Release notes [1]
> > * The official Apache source and binary distributions to be deployed to
> > dist.apache.org  [2]
> > * Source code tag "v0.3.0-candidate-3" [4] with git sha
> > 951095a71f7471dca028da0a330bc1a5e0707333a61fa4a09c8ea0f0a144d5628b511487e2442ebe290b9642b6b8ca7dee486a18a8339c893c37253724ad5fd4
> > apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> > PulsarManager's KEYS file contains PGP keys we used to sign this release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS <
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/KEYS>
> >
> > Please download these packages and review this release candidate:
> >
> > - Review release notes
> > - Download the source package (verify shasum, and asc) and follow the
> > instructions to build and run the pulsar-manager front end and back end
> > service.
> > - Download the binary package (verify shasum, and asc) and follow the
> > instructions to run run the pulsar-manager front end and back end service.
> >
> > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority
> > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes.
> >
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-manager/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-bin.tar.gz
> > <
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-manager/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-bin.tar.gz
> > >
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-manager/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-src.tar.gz
> > <
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/pulsar/pulsar-manager/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0/apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-src.tar.gz
> > >
> >
> > SHA-512 checksums:
> >
> > 6ffa5921765ee94a404792e98eb4b3cbda9e016c6661ef12e4e873e7e452301bc05650709955b012d08048e418133948a628ad55bc91ac65836022e1ea426d6f
> > apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-bin.tar.gz
> > 951095a71f7471dca028da0a330bc1a5e0707333a61fa4a09c8ea0f0a144d5628b511487e2442ebe290b9642b6b8ca7dee486a18a8339c893c37253724ad5fd4
> > apache-pulsar-manager-0.3.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> >
> >
> >

Re: [VOTE] [PIP-153] Optimize metadataPositions in MLPendingAckStore

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

mattison chao  于2022年5月12日周四 21:17写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Mattison
>
> On Thu, 12 May 2022 at 12:15, Ran Gao  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Ran
> >
> > On 2022/04/25 06:54:58 一苇以航 wrote:
> > > Hi Pulsar Community.
> > >
> > > This is the voting thread for PIP-153. It will stay open for at least 48
> > hours.
> > >
> > > The proposal can be found:https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15073
> > >
> > > Discuss thread:
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/svmbp8ybn6l8o0o8dmvsysnb86qj77r3
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Xiangying
> > >
> > > 
> >

Re: [VOTE] [PIP-158] Split client TLS transport encryption from authentication

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Yunze Xu  于2022年5月14日周六 18:04写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks,
> Yunze
>

Re: [DISCUSSION] PIP-156: Enable system topic by default

[Hang Chen]

+1 (binding)

Thanks,
Hang

Ran Gao  于2022年5月11日周三 13:54写道：
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Ran
>
> On 2022/04/26 12:07:32 guo jiwei wrote:
> > Hi community:
> >In PIP-39
> > ,
> > we have introduced namespace event to support topic level policy. This
> > feature was released in Pulsar 2.6.
> >
> >Then PIP-92
> > ,
> > we support topic policy to replicate across clusters and release in Pulsar
> > 2.10.
> >
> > And with version iteration, the corresponding topic policy CLI and
> > functions are mature and stable, but users need to enable system topic to
> > support these features.  So it's better to enable system topic by default.
> >
> >
> > So I have opened apache/pulsar#15333
> >  to discuss this.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Jiwei Guo (Tboy)
> >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] new Committer Qiang Zhao (mattisonchao)

[Hang Chen]

Congrats Qiang!

Thanks,
Hang

Baozi  于2022年5月5日周四 08:59写道：
>
> Congrats !
>
> Thanks,
> Baozi
>
> > 2022年5月5日 08:4032，PengHui Li  写道：
> >
> > Congrats
>

Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Nicolò Boschi

[Hang Chen]

Congrats, Nicolò!

Best,
Hang

ZhangJian He  于2022年4月27日周三 11:35写道：
>
> Congratulations, Nicolò!
>
> Thanks
> ZhangJian He
>
> Michael Marshall  于2022年4月27日周三 11:24写道：
>
> > Congratulations, Nicolò!
> >
> > - Michael
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 9:39 PM Haiting Jiang 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Congrats!
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > Haiting
> > >
> > > On 2022/04/26 23:48:25 PengHui Li wrote:
> > > > The Apache Pulsar Project Management Committee (PMC) has invited Nicolò
> > > > Boschi
> > > > https://github.com/nicoloboschi to become a committer and we are
> > pleased to
> > > > announce that he has accepted.
> > > >
> > > > Welcome and Congratulations, Nicolò Boschi
> > > >
> > > > Please join us in congratulating and welcoming Nicolò Boschi onboard!
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Penghui Li on behalf of the Pulsar PMC
> > > >
> >

Re: Call for projects and mentors for OSPP 2022

[Hang Chen]

Thanks for Penghui and Dianjin.

Project Name: Compaction with tiered storage

Project Description: (at most 1000 words)

Use the tiered storage to store the compacted data to save costs and
to avoid the impaction of the BookKeeper cluster.

The topic compaction reads all the compacted data along with the
additional data after the last compaction. If many topics enabled
topic compaction or with a large size compacted data, the compaction
task will impact the BookKeeper cluster. Leverage the tiered storage,
the compacted data will read from the tiered storage directly so that
the Bookkeeper cluster can provide more reliable and stable service
quality.


Difficulty Level:
- [ ] Basic
- [x] Advanced

Project Validation Items:
Item 1: Write a proposal to describe your design
Item 2: Write a MVP for this proposal
Item 3: Implement this feature and Push the PR out
Item 4: Add unit tests


Project Mentor: Hang Chen
Your Name: Hang Chen
Your Email: chenh...@apache.org
Your Apache ID: chenhang

Yu  于2022年4月25日周一 18:47写道：
>
> Thanks Penghui and Dianjin.
>
> Lili and I will submit applications to improve our user experience on the
> Pulsar website and documentation. We aim to fix some of these issues [1].
> Feel free to comment if you have more suggestions on that, thanks!
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Awebsite
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 9:23 PM PengHui Li  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Open Source Promotion Plan, OSPP[1] is open for project registration,
> > like Google Summer of Code. This Plan aims to encourage college students
> > to participate in open-source projects and make contributions.
> >
> > The project idea is open from 4/21, 2022 to 5/9, 2022(UTC+8).
> > Apache Pulsar ended up with 6 projects seats. If you have great ideas,
> > please copy the following template and fill in the fields.
> > Once you have completed your project ideas, you can reply to this email.
> > We will help you register for the program. Note that One mentor can
> > mentor one project at a time and both mentors and students can
> > receive financial awards for completed projects. Only Pulsar committers
> > can be the mentors as asked by the OSPP.
> >
> > The project can include feature catchup, ecological tool construction,
> > new features of the pulsar and so on.
> >
> > Welcome to join the Pulsar
> > slack channel: #ospp-summer for asking any questions about OSPP.
> >
> > [1] https://summer-ospp.ac.cn
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Penghui
> >
> > 
> > Template
> >
> > Project Name:
> > Project Description: (at most 1000 words)
> > Difficulty Level:
> > - [ ] Basic
> > - [ ] Advanced
> > Project Validation Items:
> > Item 1:__
> > Item 2:__
> > Item 3:__
> > …
> > Project Mentor:
> > Your Name:
> > Your Email:
> > Your Apache ID:
> >

Re: [VOTE] [PIP-154] Max active transaction limitation for transaction coordinator

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

Enrico Olivelli  于2022年4月25日周一 00:12写道：
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Enrico
>
> Il Dom 24 Apr 2022, 05:59 Haiting Jiang  ha
> scritto:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Haiting
> >
> > On 2022/04/24 02:00:39 丛搏 wrote:
> > > Hi Pulsar community,
> > >
> > > This is the voting thread for PIP-154. It will stay open for at least 48
> > hours.
> > >
> > > The proposal can be found: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15133
> > >
> > > Discuss thread:
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/h8gzgs78bm4pzy2rjtgvvmo1jbzttcx8
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Bo
> > >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-156: Build and Run Pulsar Server on Java 17

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年4月25日周一 09:18写道：
>
> +1
>
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 1:07 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> > This is close and much work is done.
> >
> > +1.
> >
> > > On Apr 20, 2022, at 9:37 AM, Heesung Sohn 
> > > 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Pulsar Community,
> > >
> > > Please review and vote on this PIP.
> > >
> > > PIP link : https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15207
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > --
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Heesung Sohn
> > >
> > > Platform Engineer
> > >
> > > e: heesung.s...@streamnative.io
> > >
> > > streamnative.io
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> >
> >

Re: [VOTE] PIP-155: Drop support for Python2

[Hang Chen]

+1

Thanks,
Hang

PengHui Li  于2022年4月25日周一 09:21写道：
>
> +1
>
> Penghui
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 7:18 PM r...@apache.org 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Xiaolong Ran
> >
> > Jiuming Tao  于2022年4月21日周四 19:00写道：
> >
> > > +1
> > > Thanks,
> > > Tao Jiuming
> > >
> > > > 2022年4月20日 下午8:42，Matteo Merli  写道：
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/15185
> > > >
> > > > ## Motivation
> > > >
> > > > Python 2.x has been deprecated for many years now and it was
> > > > officially end-of-lifed 2.5 years ago
> > > > (https://www.python.org/doc/sunset-python-2/).
> > > >
> > > > We have well reached the point by which we need to drop Python 2.7
> > > > compatibility for Pulsar client and for Pulsar functions.
> > > >
> > > > Based on Python end-of-life policies, there are 4 versions of Python
> > > > that are currently supported: 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10.
> > > > https://endoflife.date/python
> > > >
> > > > That gives a 5 years support schedule from release to EoL.
> > > >
> > > > ## Goal
> > > >
> > > > Support only the last 4 Python releases Pulsar client and for Pulsar
> > > > functions, currently 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10. Once 3.7 reaches
> > > > end-of-life, it will be dropped by Pulsar too.
> > > >
> > > > This policy will be also applied to the Pulsar patch releases which
> > > > will stop providing Python wheel files for the deprecated versions.
> > > >
> > > > ## API Changes
> > > >
> > > > No changes at this time, though Pulsar Python client library will be
> > > > now free to use Python3 specific syntaxes and libraries.
> > > >
> > > > ## Changes
> > > >
> > > > 1. Switch the CI build to run Python client lib tests with Python3
> > > > 2. Switch integration tests to use Python3
> > > > 3. Stop building and distributing wheel files for Python 2.7
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matteo Merli
> > > > 
> > >
> > >
> >