Thanks for the KIP!
One meta question: Will users that are currently using the existing testing
code with the "classifier:test" approach:
1) have access to the new testing utilities without updating
the gradle.build file
2) can they continue to use the current testing code with the
classifier approach?
A question on the KIP itself. Since we have factory methods for creating
`ConsumerRecord` objects where we can either override or use the default
topic do we still all overloads on `ConsumerRecordFactory`?
Maybe we could just have constructors specifying the default topic and
users could provide "null" if not wanting to specify a topic when creating
the `ConsumerRecordFactory`.
Even though this is an initial KIP, I agree that adding some helper methods
for result verification would be a good idea, but I don't think it should
hold up the KIP process if we don't get to it on this pass.
Otherwise, it's a +1 from me.
Thanks,
Bill
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 1:01 PM, Guozhang Wang <wangg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Matthias, I made a pass over the wiki and left some comments; I see
> you have addressed most of them. Here are a few more:
>
> 1. "TopologyTestDriver#process()": how about rename it to "pipeInput" or
> "sendInput"?
>
> 2. For "ConsumerRecordFactory" constructor where "startTimestampMs" is not
> specified, what would be the default value?
>
>
> This is not a comment but just reminder:
>
> 3. ConsumerRecordFactory: I have to admit that putting this class in
> o.a.k.streams.test may not be ideal, and if we are going to have an
> o.a.k.clients.test in the future testing artifact this may better be moved
> there.
>
>
> Guozhang
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Saïd Bouras <said.bou...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Matthias,
> >
> > I read the KIP and it will be very helpful thanks to the changes, I don't
> > see though a part that handle topologies that use avro schemas, is it in
> > the scope of the KIP ?
> >
> > I open an issue two month ago in the schema-registry repo :
> > https://github.com/confluentinc/schema-registry/issues/651 that explain
> > that when testing topologies using schema registry, the schema registry
> > client mock is not thread safe and thus in the different processors nodes
> > when deserializing it will not work...
> >
> > In my unit tests I wrapped the mock schema registry client into a
> singleton
> > but this solution is not enough satisfying.
> >
> > Thanks in advance, regards :-)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:06 AM Matthias J. Sax <matth...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Kafka community,
> > >
> > > I want to propose KIP-247 to add public test utils to the Streams API.
> > > The goal is to simplify testing of Kafka Streams applications.
> > >
> > > Please find details in the wiki:
> > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
> > 247%3A+Add+public+test+utils+for+Kafka+Streams
> > >
> > > This is an initial KIP, and we hope to add more utility functions
> later.
> > > Thus, this KIP is not comprehensive but a first step. Of course, we can
> > > enrich this initial KIP if we think it falls too short. But we should
> > > not aim to be comprehensive to keep the scope manageable.
> > >
> > > In fact, I think we should add some more helpers to simplify result
> > > verification. I will update the KIP with this asap. Just wanted to
> start
> > > the discussion early on.
> > >
> > > An initial WIP PR can be found here:
> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/4402
> > >
> > > I also included the user-list (please hit "reply-all" to include both
> > > lists in this KIP discussion).
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot.
> > >
> > >
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Saïd BOURAS
> >
> > Consultant Big Data
> > Mobile: 0662988731
> > Zenika Paris
> > 10 rue de Milan 75009 Paris
> > Standard : +33(0)1 45 26 19 15 <+33(0)145261915> - Fax : +33(0)1 72 70
> 45
> > 10
> > <+33(0)172704510>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
>
