Thanks for updating! I looked over the changes and I think it's good.
Walker
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 5:44 AM Sagar wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Bumping this one again to see if folks have any other
> comments/observations.
>
> Thanks!
> Sagar.
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Sagar wrote:
>
> >
Hello All,
Bumping this one again to see if folks have any other comments/observations.
Thanks!
Sagar.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Sagar wrote:
> Thanks Walker for the comments
>
> I have updated the KIP with all the suggestions.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 10:59 PM Walker
Thanks Walker for the comments
I have updated the KIP with all the suggestions.
Thanks!
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 10:59 PM Walker Carlson
wrote:
> Hi Sagar,
>
> I just finished reading the KIP and this seems to be a great addition.
>
> I agree with Matthias that the interface with a default
Hi Sagar,
I just finished reading the KIP and this seems to be a great addition.
I agree with Matthias that the interface with a default implementation and
deprecating partition() does seem cleaner. It has been a pattern that we
have followed in the past. How I would handle a custom streams
Hi Matthias,
I agree that working with interfaces is cleaner. As such, there's not much
value in keeping both the methods. So, we can go down the route of
deprecating partition(). The only question I have is till deprecation if we
get both partition() and partitions() implemented, we may need to
Thanks for explaining you reasoning.
I agree that it might not be ideal to have both methods implemented, but
if we deprecate the exiting one, it would only be an issue until we
remove the old one? Or do we see value to keep both methods?
In general, working with interfaces is cleaner than
Hi Matthias,
Thanks for your review. The reason I chose to introduce a new abstract
class is that, while it doesn't entail any changes in the StreamPartitioner
interface, I also disabled the partition() method in that class. Reason to
do that is that I didn't want a scenario where a user
Thanks for the KIP. Overall a good addition.
I am actually not sure if we need to add a new class? From my
understanding, if there is exactly one abstract method, the interface is
still functional? Thus, we could add a new method to
`StreamsPartitioner` with a default implementation (that
Hi Florin,
Thanks for the comment! You brought up a very good point.. Actually I was
focussed too much on the multicast operation and didn't pay attention to
the other places where StramPartitioner is being used. TBH, I wasn't even
aware that the StreamPartitioner is being used for FK joins so
Hi Sagar,
Thanks for the KIP.
I am wondering about the following. What about other classes than the
org.apache.kafka.streams.processor.internals.RecordCollectorImpl. Would
they still call .partition(...) and just crash? Or is it a given that they
never receive a reference to a Partitioner of
Hi All,
I’m thinking to move this KIP to vote section if there aren’t any
objections.
Plz let me know if I that’s ok.
Thanks!
Sagar.
On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 10:32 PM, Sagar wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Bumping this discussion thread again to see if there are any
> comments/concerns on this.
>
>
Hi All,
Bumping this discussion thread again to see if there are any
comments/concerns on this.
Thanks!
Sagar.
On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 11:44 PM Sagar wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would like to open a discussion thread on
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=211883356
>
Hi All,
I would like to open a discussion thread on
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=211883356.
Thanks!
Sagar.
13 matches
Mail list logo
