Any thoughts here?
On 2018/04/23 05:47:24, Uddhav Arote <a...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi,> > > The V1 message format is> > > > 1. v1 (supported since 0.10.0)> > 2. Message => Crc MagicByte Attributes Key Value> > 3. Crc => int32> > 4. MagicByte => int8> > 5. Attributes => int8> > 6. Timestamp => int64> > 7. Key => bytes> > 8. Value => bytes> > > > Would it be a good suggestion to have message format like> > > > 1. v1 (supported since 0.10.0)> > 2. Message => Crc MagicByte Attributes Key Value> > 3. Crc => int32> > 4. MagicByte => int8> > 5. Attributes => int8> > 6. Timestamp => int64[] <-- array to hold ingest time from all brokers> > 7. Key => bytes> > 8. Value => bytes> > > > This will be a good feature to keep track (ingest time) of the> > message (set) downstream. For detailed latency calculation, exactly knowing> > where a message was at a given time?> > Is there any plan on including this or there is any reason for not adding> > this to the message format?> > > Yes, the header will become variable length. But can't there be a control> > variable to keep a limit size of this array?> > > Uddhav> >
