> >
> >
> > Although I can't start a KIP... again.. (lost the count now).. can
> > someone add me authorizations to the WIKI Page so I can create the
> > page and start a proper discussion there?
>
> Hmm, I don't have permissions to add you. admins?
Perhaps I should email the list with a diffe
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017, at 10:12, Clebert Suconic wrote:
> > As I said before, a connection string might be a good idea. A URI, no.
>
>
> Same purpose.. I'm fine with that...
Sounds good to me. You might want to discuss this on the librdkafka
mailing list as well, to see if there are any ideas th
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017, at 13:33, Michael Pearce wrote:
> To me, this is a lot more in line with many other systems connections, to
> have the ability to have a single connection string / uri, is this really
> that left field suggesting or wanting this?
>
> If anything this bring kafka more standardi
> As I said before, a connection string might be a good idea. A URI, no.
Same purpose.. I'm fine with that...
Although I can't start a KIP... again.. (lost the count now).. can
someone add me authorizations to the WIKI Page so I can create the
page and start a proper discussion there?
You can update your properties file in the same way with the current
clients, right? I don't understand how mapping properties into a single
string makes things easier.
Ismael
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> Another useful feature for this...
>
> Say that I am writing
Another useful feature for this...
Say that I am writing an application... if I write this URI on any of
my internal properties.. I can tweak my Consumer or Producer without
changing any code.
Say, you store the URI on your project's configuration xml..read it
and start your consumer... later on
To me, this is a lot more in line with many other systems connections, to have
the ability to have a single connection string / uri, is this really that left
field suggesting or wanting this?
If anything this bring kafka more standardised approach imo, to have a unified
resource identifier, pro
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Colin McCabe wrote:
> We used URIs as file paths in Hadoop. I think it was a mistake, for a
> few different reasons.
>
> URIs are actually very complex. You probably know about scheme, host,
> and port, but did you know about authority, user-info, query, fragment,
We used URIs as file paths in Hadoop. I think it was a mistake, for a
few different reasons.
URIs are actually very complex. You probably know about scheme, host,
and port, but did you know about authority, user-info, query, fragment,
scheme-specific-part? Do you know what they do in Hadoop? T
I can start a KIP discussion on this.. or not if you really think this
is against basic rules...
I will need authorization to create the page.. if you could assign me
regardless so I can have it for next time?
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> Just as a facility for user
Just as a facility for users... I think it would be easier to
prototype consumers and producer by simply doing new
Consumer("tcp://HOST:PORT") or new Producer("tcp://HOST:PORT")...
on the other project I work (ActiveMQ Artemis) we used to do a similar
way to what Kafka does..we then provided the U
Hey Clebert,
Is there a motivation for adding a second way? We generally try to avoid
having two ways to do something unless it's really needed...I suspect you
have a reason for wanting this, though.
-Jay
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:15 AM Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> At ActiveMQ and ActiveMQ Artemis,
Ping???
Any thoughts?
Or anyone can help me with write access to the Wiki so I can start a
KIP discussion? my userID is clebert.suco...@gmail.com
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:45 PM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> I believe I need write access to the WIKI Page:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/
I believe I need write access to the WIKI Page:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals
As I don't see the KIP Template..
If anyone could please include me the to the group please?
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Christopher Shannon
wrote:
> I think t
I think this would be useful as a secondary way to configure. If others
agree then you can write up a KIP and it can be discussed in more detail.
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Clebert Suconic
wrote:
> Maybe I didn't make the message clear enough...
>
> Would using an URI to the constructor (i
Maybe I didn't make the message clear enough...
Would using an URI to the constructor (in addition to the properties)
help the API, or anyone see a reason to not do it?
KafkaConsumer consumer = new
KafkaConsumer<>("tcp://localhost:?receive.buffer.bytes=-2", new
ByteArrayDeserializer(), new By
At ActiveMQ and ActiveMQ Artemis, ConnectionFactories have an
interesting feature where you can pass parameters through an URI.
I was looking at Producer and Consumer APIs, and these two classes are
using a method that I considered old for Artemis resembling HornetQ:
Instead of passing a Properti
17 matches
Mail list logo
