2019-12-04 09:18:52 UTC - Brian Doran: Failed to connect .. which property in 
standalone.conf is that?
----
2019-12-04 09:18:58 UTC - Brian Doran: I have
# Whether statistics are enabled
enableStatistics=true

# Stats Provider Class (if statistics are enabled)
statsProviderClass=org.apache.bookkeeper.stats.prometheus.PrometheusMetricsProvider

# Default port for Prometheus metrics exporter
prometheusStatsHttpPort=8000
----
2019-12-04 09:19:30 UTC - Brian Doran: in standalone.conf .. copied from 
bookeeper.conf it's enabled there too.
----
2019-12-04 09:19:48 UTC - Brian Doran: is bookeeper.conf used in standalone 
mode?
----
2019-12-04 10:16:48 UTC - Keith: hi, I have just run a dependency checker 
against 2.4.1 and I get the following vulnerabilities ...
```[ERROR] 
pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/org.apache.commons/commons-compress/pom.xml:
 CVE-2018-1324, CVE-2018-11771, CVE-2019-12402
[ERROR] 
pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/org.eclipse.jetty/jetty-util/pom.xml: 
CVE-2019-10247, CVE-2019-10241
[ERROR] 
pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty-tcnative-boringssl-static/pom.xml:
 CVE-2019-16869, CVE-2015-2156, CVE-2014-3488
[ERROR] pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty-all/pom.xml: 
CVE-2019-16869
[ERROR] 
pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/com.fasterxml.jackson.core/jackson-databind/pom.xml:
 CVE-2019-16942, CVE-2019-16943, CVE-2019-17267, CVE-2019-17531, 
CVE-2019-16335, CVE-2019-14540
[ERROR] 
pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/com.typesafe.netty/netty-reactive-streams/pom.xml:
 CVE-2019-16869, CVE-2015-2156, CVE-2014-3488
[ERROR] pulsar-client-2.4.1.jar\META-INF/maven/com.google.guava/guava/pom.xml: 
CVE-2018-10237```
Is there any plan to fix these?
----
2019-12-04 11:22:34 UTC - tuteng: Bookie's HTTP service is not turned on in 
standalone mode of pulsar.
----
2019-12-04 12:35:05 UTC - Brian Doran: Got it. Thanks. @tuteng
----
2019-12-04 14:52:05 UTC - sbourke: @sbourke has joined the channel
----
2019-12-04 15:20:08 UTC - juraj: hi @Sijie Guo, just an idea for the future - 
if candidate release images were pushed to docker hub, more people would be 
able to participate on the validation (e.g. running them on their dev envs)
----
2019-12-04 16:15:14 UTC - Vladimir Shchur: Hi, guys! While developing .net 
client we've found two issues with nacks and batch messages, are they known 
issues? Let's say we have 10 messages in a batch
1. Let's say MaxRedeliverCount is 1 consumer acked 9 messages and 1 nacked. All 
10 messages will be redelivered which will lead to double processing of 9 
messages
2. Let's say MaxRedeliverCount is 0, so no redelivers happen. Consumer acks 9 
messages and 1 nacks. This will lead to all 10 messages coming to dead letter 
queue.
----
2019-12-04 16:26:52 UTC - Sijie Guo: thank you @juraj ! Add @xiaolong.ran who 
is the release manager of 2.4.2. @xiaolong.ran can you incorporate juraj’s idea 
into improving our future releases?
+1 : juraj
----
2019-12-04 16:28:12 UTC - Sijie Guo: I think so of them are already fixed. They 
will probably be released as part of 2.5.0 and 2.4.1 releases.
----
2019-12-04 16:33:08 UTC - Sijie Guo: 1) I think this is related to current 
acknowledgment tracking is done at entry (batch) level. If 10 messages are 
batched into one batch, you might see 10 messages being redelivered. There is a 
GitHub issue tracking the enhancement.

2) this might be related to 1). Can you file a GitHub issue for it? @Penghui Li 
can take a look at it.
----
2019-12-04 16:35:22 UTC - Sijie Guo: I remember there was a bug related to 
listing non-persistent topics. That can be related. Can you explain more about 
the behaviors you have seen when listing non-persistent topics?
----
2019-12-04 18:57:01 UTC - Grant English: @Grant English has joined the channel
----
2019-12-04 19:04:31 UTC - Vladimir Shchur: @Sijie Guo Thank you, will create 
the issue for 2. As for 1, I couldn't find the issue to give my vote to, can 
you please help?
----
2019-12-04 19:06:37 UTC - Ryan: Hello, where is Pulsar at with consumer 
filtering? We have a use case where we have multiple high volume, low latency 
topics that are being read by multiple consumers. Each of these consumers are 
reading the entire data stream from these topics, but ultimately only need to 
process ~1-5% of the data, which is causing a lot of bandwidth waste on our 
network. While I understand that we could use Lambda functions to create a 
million curated topics, due to the nature of our environment this is untenable. 
It would be significantly better if there was an option to allow the consumer 
to dynamically filter topic messages upon request or at subscription creation 
time. I found <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/3302> but it appears to 
be closed. Is there any support or planned support for this feature?
----
2019-12-04 19:34:09 UTC - Sijie Guo: @Vladimir Shchur I think this is the 
related issue: <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/4931>
----
2019-12-04 19:42:49 UTC - Vladimir Shchur: Thank you, will add my example there
----
2019-12-04 20:12:55 UTC - Ming: @Ryan Have you considered using Functions to do 
a content based routing? 
<https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/en/functions-overview/#content-based-routing-example>
----
2019-12-04 20:17:47 UTC - Vladimir Shchur: By the way, the ticket says 
area/client, does the server support redelivery by batch parts? If yes, we can 
implement it in dotnet client ourselves.
----
2019-12-04 20:19:58 UTC - Sijie Guo: ah, I think we need to add a tag to 
area/broker as well. because 1) the acknowledgement is done at the broker level 
2) the redelivery account is also attached by broker
----
2019-12-04 20:23:27 UTC - Ryan: Right, as I said, creating a ton of additional 
topics using Functions is untenable. Having a server-side subscription-time 
dynamic filter per consumer would be ideal. Can you create a server-side 
subscription-time dynamic filter on a topic using Functions without creating 
additional downstream topics? The current Function API requires input and 
output topics.
----
2019-12-04 20:57:34 UTC - Greg Hoover: Looking for some guidance on using 
Pulsar for large messages up to 10MB in some cases or more. Content is nested 
JSON with embedded photos as they enter Pulsar on input topics. As these large 
messages are processed, the photos can be split out separately, thus decreasing 
the message size on downstream topics to a max of 5MB, and usually less than 
1MB. Would be nice to keep these large messages in cold tiered S3 storage for 
replay at a later time if necessary, and to preserve an audit trail of exactly 
what data was contributed to the system in time sequence. Just wondering if we 
should try to use Pulsar for these large messages or if it’s better to seek a 
different solution. 
----
2019-12-04 21:25:00 UTC - David Kjerrumgaard: @Greg Hoover The max message size 
is now configurable for Pulsar.  See 
<https://medium.com/streamnative/whats-new-in-apache-pulsar-2-4-0-d646f6727642>
----
2019-12-04 21:25:28 UTC - David Kjerrumgaard: And 
<https://github.com/apache/pulsar/wiki/PIP-37%3A-Large-message-size-handling-in-Pulsar>
----
2019-12-04 21:27:30 UTC - David Kjerrumgaard: @Greg Hoover As for offloading to 
tiered storage, messages can be offloaded on a per topic basis via the 
<https://pulsar.apache.org/docs/en/pulsar-admin/#offload> command, so you can 
control when these messages are moved to S3.
----
2019-12-04 23:51:08 UTC - Addison Higham: can someone remind me... if we set an 
offload threshold on an existing namespace, will it eventually trigger offloads 
for all the topics in the namespace?
----
2019-12-04 23:59:38 UTC - Addison Higham: nm, found the doc, appears to happen 
when the next segment close/open happens... now just need to remember how I 
have my segments set up :slightly_smiling_face:
+1 : David Kjerrumgaard
thumbsup_all : jia zhai
----
2019-12-05 00:01:56 UTC - David Kjerrumgaard: Was getting ready to respond 
:smiley:
----
2019-12-05 00:12:23 UTC - Luke Lu: 
<https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/5798>
----
2019-12-05 02:02:34 UTC - baishen: @baishen has joined the channel
----
2019-12-05 08:41:07 UTC - juraj: ps. the 2.4.2 docker images are still not out 
- is this expected? can i help in any way?
----
2019-12-05 08:42:33 UTC - xiaolong.ran: i am pushing the docker images of 2.4.2
fireworks : juraj
----

Reply via email to