Hello everyone,
The KIP-862 vote has passed with:
binding +1s (John, Guozhang, Bruno)
non-binding +1s (Jim)
Thank you everyone for reviewing the KIP and voting.
Best,
Vicky
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 11:44 AM Bruno Cadonna wrote:
> Hi Vicky,
>
> Thanks for the KIP!
>
> I think the KIP looks goo
Hi Vicky,
Thanks for the KIP!
I think the KIP looks good!
You described how the self-join is optimized when the names of the state
stores are automatically generated by Streams. I think for completeness
you should also mention what happens when users explicitly name the
state stores of the se
Hi Vicky,
I'm +1 (non-binding); thanks for the KIP (and PR)!
Cheers,
Jim
On Tue, Sep 13, 2022 at 12:05 PM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Thank Vicky! I'm +1.
>
> Guozhang
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 7:02 PM John Roesler wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the updates, Vicky!
> >
> > I've reviewed the KIP and yo
Thank Vicky! I'm +1.
Guozhang
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 7:02 PM John Roesler wrote:
> Thanks for the updates, Vicky!
>
> I've reviewed the KIP and your POC PR,
> and I'm +1 (binding).
>
> Thanks!
> -John
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2022, at 09:13, Vasiliki Papavasileiou wrote:
> > Hey Guozhang,
> >
> > G
Thanks for the updates, Vicky!
I've reviewed the KIP and your POC PR,
and I'm +1 (binding).
Thanks!
-John
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022, at 09:13, Vasiliki Papavasileiou wrote:
> Hey Guozhang,
>
> Great suggestion, I made the change.
>
> Best,
> Vicky
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:43 PM Guozhang Wang wr
Hey Guozhang,
Great suggestion, I made the change.
Best,
Vicky
On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:43 PM Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Thanks Vicky, that reads much clearer now.
>
> Just regarding the value string name itself: "self.join" may be confusing
> compared to other values that people would think befo
Thanks Vicky, that reads much clearer now.
Just regarding the value string name itself: "self.join" may be confusing
compared to other values that people would think before this config is
enabled, self-join are not allowed at all. Maybe we can rename it to
"single.store.self.join"?
Guozhang
On F
Hey Guozhang,
Ah it seems my text was not very clear :)
With "TOPOLOGY_OPTIMIZATION_CONFIG will be extended to accept a list of
optimization rule configs" I meant that it will accept the new value
strings for each optimization rule. Let me rephrase that in the KIP to make
it clearer.
Is it better
Thanks Vicky,
I read through the KIP again and it looks good to me. Just a quick question
regarding the public config changes: you mentioned "No public interfaces
will be impacted. The config TOPOLOGY_OPTIMIZATION_CONFIG will be extended
to accept a list of optimization rule configs in addition to