Hello all,
in my company we plan to set up the following architecture for our client:
An internal kafka cluster in our company, and deploy a webapp (our software
solution) on premise for our clients.
We think to create one producer by "webapp" client in order to push in a global
topic (in
Sure. Sorry I was not clear.
Thank you!
lör 10 mars 2018 kl. 00:54 skrev Matthias J. Sax :
> If there is only one partition by task, processing order is guaranteed.
>
> For default partitions grouper, it depends on your program. If you read
> from multiple topics and
thx for your reply!
I see that it is designed to operate on an infinite, unbounded stream of data.
now I want to process for unbounded stream but divided by time interval .
so what can I do for doing this ?
funk...@live.com
From: Guozhang
Great! Have a good weekend.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Ismael Juma wrote:
> Thanks Jeff:
>
> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4678
>
> Ismael
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Damian Guy wrote:
>
> > Hi Jeff,
> >
> > Thanks, we will look into
Thanks Jeff:
https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4678
Ismael
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Damian Guy wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Thanks, we will look into this.
>
> Regards,
> Damian
>
> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 at 18:27 Jeff Chao wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
>
If there is only one partition by task, processing order is guaranteed.
For default partitions grouper, it depends on your program. If you read
from multiple topics and join/merge them, a task gets multiple
partitions (from different topics) assigned.
-Matthias
On 3/9/18 2:42 PM, Stas Chizhov
> Also note, that the processing order might slightly differ if you
process the same data twice
Is this still a problem when default partition grouper is used (with 1
partition per task)?
Thank you,
Stanislav.
2018-03-09 3:19 GMT+01:00 Matthias J. Sax :
> Thanks
Sweet! I think this pretty much wraps up all the discussion points.
I'll update the KIP with all the relevant aspects we discussed and call for
a vote.
I'll also comment on the TopologyTestDriver ticket noting this modular test
strategy.
Thanks, everyone.
-John
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 10:57 AM,
Hi Wim,
One off-the-cuff idea is that you maybe don't need to actually delay
anonymizing the data. Instead, you can just create a separate pathway that
immediately anonymizes the data. Something like this:
(raw-input topic, GDPR retention period set)
|\->[streams apps that needs non-anonymized
Hi Jie,
This is by design of Kafka Streams, please read this doc for more details
(search for "outputs of the Wordcount application is actually a continuous
stream of updates"):
https://kafka.apache.org/0110/documentation/streams/quickstart
Note this semantics applies for both windowed and
Hello Wim,
Thanks for your explanations, it makes more sense to me know. I think your
scenario may be better described as a "re-processing" case than a "delayed
processing" case, since you are effectively processing the un-anonymised
data once, sending results to the topic; and then later you
Hi,
I need to write unit tests with Compacted Topics in local cluster. Has
anyone done something like that? Any tips/guidance will be much appreciated.
Thanks
Sirisha
John,
Sorry for the delayed response. Thanks for the KIP, I'm +1 on it, and I
don't have any further comments on the KIP itself aside from the comments
that others have raised.
Regarding the existing MockProcessorContext and its removal in favor of the
one added from this KIP, I'm actually in
Hi:
I used TimeWindow for aggregate data in kafka.
this is code snippet ;
view.flatMap(new
MultipleKeyValueMapper(client)).groupByKey(Serialized.with(Serdes.String(),
Serdes.serdeFrom(new CountInfoSerializer(), new
CountInfoDeserializer(
Hello,
I would like to report you on the website access issue from our Organization
LAN public IP: 182.74.52.154.
Looks like, public IP: 182.74.52.154 has been blocked at your end causing
access issue from our network users.
Could you please help me to unblock it?
Thanks in advance!
--
Hi Jeff,
Thanks, we will look into this.
Regards,
Damian
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 at 18:27 Jeff Chao wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We at Heroku have run 1.1.0 RC1 through our normal performance and
> regression test suite and have found performance to be comparable to 1.0.0.
>
> That
16 matches
Mail list logo