You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kafka.apache.org by "Matthias J. Sax" <ma...@confluent.io> on 2019/08/20 22:28:24 UTC
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore
connecting
+1 (binding)
On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
>
> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized now
>> and ready for voting.
>>
>> KIP:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
>>
>> Discussion:
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>
>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Paul
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I renamed
>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as well
>>> start a vote.
>>>
>>> KIP:
>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
>>> Discussion:
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Paul
>>>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>.
With 3 binding votes and 1 non-binding, the vote is closed and the KIP is
accepted.
I'm just wrapping up a first draft of a PR here:
https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
Thanks!
Paul
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 2:17 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks all! I updated the KIP status, and will get to the remaining TODOs
> in my PR hopefully this weekend.
>
> > On Sep 3, 2019, at 6:16 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Paul, thanks for the confirmation!
> >
> > Since we have three binding votes now I think you can proceed and mark it
> > as accepted.
> >
> >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:17 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yeah, agreed on it being the same reference. That’s the way I have it in
> >> the working PR and I’ll update the KIP for clarity.
> >>
> >>>> On Sep 3, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference".
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Matthias
> >>>
> >>>> On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> >>>> Hi Paul,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
> >>>>
> >>>> One minor comment about the following:
> >>>>
> >>>> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being
> called
> >>>> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies
> it),
> >> the
> >>>> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow
> >> for
> >>>> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store
> name*."
> >>>>
> >>>> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances
> >> are
> >>>> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
> >>>> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be
> >>>> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Guozhang
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one
> >> more
> >>>>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September,
> >> it
> >>>>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I
> could
> >> set
> >>>>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it
> >> into
> >>>>> the release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Paul
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for the KIP.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <
> >> matthias@confluent.io>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is
> >> finalized
> >>>>>>> now
> >>>>>>>>> and ready for voting.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> KIP:
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Discussion:
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>> Paul
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pgwhalen@gmail.com
> >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which
> I
> >>>>>>> renamed
> >>>>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may
> as
> >>>>> well
> >>>>>>>>>> start a vote.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> KIP:
> >>>>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
> >>>>>>>>>> <
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
> >>>>>>>>>> Discussion:
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>>>>> Paul
> >
> >
> > --
> > -- Guozhang
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>.
Thanks all! I updated the KIP status, and will get to the remaining TODOs in my PR hopefully this weekend.
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 6:16 PM, Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul, thanks for the confirmation!
>
> Since we have three binding votes now I think you can proceed and mark it
> as accepted.
>
>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:17 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, agreed on it being the same reference. That’s the way I have it in
>> the working PR and I’ll update the KIP for clarity.
>>
>>>> On Sep 3, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference".
>>>
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>>> On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
>>>>
>>>> One minor comment about the following:
>>>>
>>>> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called
>>>> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it),
>> the
>>>> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow
>> for
>>>> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*."
>>>>
>>>> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances
>> are
>>>> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
>>>> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be
>>>> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Guozhang
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one
>> more
>>>>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September,
>> it
>>>>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could
>> set
>>>>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it
>> into
>>>>> the release.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the KIP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <
>> matthias@confluent.io>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is
>> finalized
>>>>>>> now
>>>>>>>>> and ready for voting.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> KIP:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Discussion:
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
>>>>>>> renamed
>>>>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as
>>>>> well
>>>>>>>>>> start a vote.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> KIP:
>>>>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
>>>>>>>>>> <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
>>>>>>>>>> Discussion:
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>> Paul
>
>
> --
> -- Guozhang
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>.
Hi Paul, thanks for the confirmation!
Since we have three binding votes now I think you can proceed and mark it
as accepted.
On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:17 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, agreed on it being the same reference. That’s the way I have it in
> the working PR and I’ll update the KIP for clarity.
>
> > On Sep 3, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference".
> >
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> >> On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> >> Hi Paul,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
> >>
> >> One minor comment about the following:
> >>
> >> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called
> >> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it),
> the
> >> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow
> for
> >> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*."
> >>
> >> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances
> are
> >> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
> >> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be
> >> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
> >>
> >>
> >> Guozhang
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one
> more
> >>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September,
> it
> >>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could
> set
> >>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it
> into
> >>> the release.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Paul
> >>>
> >>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the KIP.
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <
> matthias@confluent.io>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> +1 (binding)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
> >>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is
> finalized
> >>>>> now
> >>>>>>> and ready for voting.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> KIP:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Discussion:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
> >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Paul
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
> >>>>> renamed
> >>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as
> >>> well
> >>>>>>>> start a vote.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> KIP:
> >>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
> >>>>>>>> <
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
> >>>>>>>> Discussion:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>>> Paul
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
--
-- Guozhang
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, agreed on it being the same reference. That’s the way I have it in the working PR and I’ll update the KIP for clarity.
> On Sep 3, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference".
>
>
> -Matthias
>
>> On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
>>
>> One minor comment about the following:
>>
>> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called
>> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it), the
>> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow for
>> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*."
>>
>> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances are
>> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
>> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be
>> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
>>
>>
>> Guozhang
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one more
>>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September, it
>>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could set
>>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it into
>>> the release.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the KIP.
>>>>
>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
>>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized
>>>>> now
>>>>>>> and ready for voting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KIP:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Discussion:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
>>>>> renamed
>>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as
>>> well
>>>>>>>> start a vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> KIP:
>>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
>>>>>>>> Discussion:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore
connecting
Posted by "Matthias J. Sax" <ma...@confluent.io>.
I am strongly in favor of "must be the same reference".
-Matthias
On 9/3/19 2:09 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
>
> One minor comment about the following:
>
> "In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called
> twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it), the
> check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow for
> duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*."
>
> It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances are
> the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
> #equals override function so that two different instances may still be
> considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
>
>
> Guozhang
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one more
>> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September, it
>> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could set
>> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it into
>> the release.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Paul
>>
>>> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the KIP.
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 (binding)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
>>>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized
>>>> now
>>>>>> and ready for voting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> KIP:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Discussion:
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
>>>> renamed
>>>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as
>> well
>>>>>>> start a vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KIP:
>>>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
>>>>>>> <
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
>>>>>>> Discussion:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Guozhang Wang <wa...@gmail.com>.
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding).
One minor comment about the following:
"In order to solve the problem of addStateStore potentially being called
twice for the same store (because more than one Supplier specifies it), the
check for duplicate stores in addStateStores will be relaxed to *allow for
duplicates if the same StoreBuilder instance for the same store name*."
It worth clarifying how should we check if the StoreBuilder instances are
the same: either 1) equality by reference or 2) equality based on e.g.
#equals override function so that two different instances may still be
considered "equal". I think you meant 1), just wanted to confirm :)
Guozhang
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 3:14 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one more
> for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September, it
> would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could set
> aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it into
> the release.
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
> > On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the KIP.
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
> >>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized
> >> now
> >>>> and ready for voting.
> >>>>
> >>>> KIP:
> >>>>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
> >>>>
> >>>> Discussion:
> >>>>
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>
> >>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Paul
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
> >> renamed
> >>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as
> well
> >>>>> start a vote.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> KIP:
> >>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
> >>>>> <
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
> >>>>> Discussion:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>> Paul
> >>>>>
> >>
> >>
>
--
-- Guozhang
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the votes all! With two binding votes we’re in need of one more for the KIP to be accepted. With the 2.4 release coming in September, it would be great to get another committer to take a look soon so I could set aside some time to get implementation/documentation done to make it into the release.
Thanks,
Paul
> On Aug 20, 2019, at 5:47 PM, Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the KIP.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>>
>>> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
>>> I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized
>> now
>>>> and ready for voting.
>>>>
>>>> KIP:
>>>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
>>>>
>>>> Discussion:
>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>
>>>> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
>> renamed
>>>>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as well
>>>>> start a vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> KIP:
>>>>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
>>>>> <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
>>>>> Discussion:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] KIP-401: TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
Posted by Bill Bejeck <bb...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for the KIP.
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 6:28 PM Matthias J. Sax <ma...@confluent.io>
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> On 6/17/19 2:32 PM, John Roesler wrote:
> > I'm +1 (nonbinding) on the current iteration of the proposal.
> >
> > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 1:58 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I spoke too early a month ago, but I believe the proposal is finalized
> now
> >> and ready for voting.
> >>
> >> KIP:
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756
> >>
> >> Discussion:
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>
> >> Pull request (still a WIP, obviously):
> >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/6824
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:00 PM Paul Whalen <pg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> After some good discussion on and adjustments to KIP-401 (which I
> renamed
> >>> slightly for clarity), chatter has died down so I figured I may as well
> >>> start a vote.
> >>>
> >>> KIP:
> >>> TransformerSupplier/ProcessorSupplier StateStore connecting
> >>> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=97553756>
> >>> Discussion:
> >>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/600996d83d485f2b8daf45037de64a60cebdfac9b234bf3449b6b753@%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>> Paul
> >>>
>
>