You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@kafka.apache.org by Dan Hoffman <ho...@gmail.com> on 2013/11/29 15:45:54 UTC
bug in documentation?
*'Not that partitioning means Kafka only provides a total order over
messages within a partition. This combined with the ability to partition
data by key is sufficient for the vast majority of applications. However,
if you require a total order over messages this can be achieved with a
topic that has only one partition, though this will mean only one consumer
process.'*
The first word should say *NOTE*, right? Otherwise, I don't understand the
meaning.
Re: bug in documentation?
Posted by Joe Stein <jo...@stealth.ly>.
Thanks!!!
JIRA updated along with the patch
/*******************************************
Joe Stein
Founder, Principal Consultant
Big Data Open Source Security LLC
http://www.stealth.ly
Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop>
********************************************/
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Marc Labbe <mr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> while we're at it... I noticed the following typos in
> section 4.1 Motivation (
> http://kafka.apache.org/documentation.html#majordesignelements)
>
> "we knew" instead of "we new"
> ----
> Finally in cases where the stream is fed into other data systems for
> serving we new the system would have to be able to guarantee
> fault-tolerance in the presence of machine failures.
> ----
>
> "led us" instead of "led use"
> ----
> Supporting these uses led use to a design with a number of unique elements,
> more akin to a database log then a traditional messaging system. We will
> outline some elements of the design in the following sections.
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Joe Stein <jo...@stealth.ly> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Dan, nice catch. I uploaded a patch to the documentation to
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1153 once another committer
> +1
> > it I will push the change. any feedback on my change in the JIRA is
> > welcomed I think changing it to say "Kafka only provides a total order
> over
> > ..." made sense to me in context of the rest.
> >
> > /*******************************************
> > Joe Stein
> > Founder, Principal Consultant
> > Big Data Open Source Security LLC
> > http://www.stealth.ly
> > Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop>
> > ********************************************/
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Dan Hoffman <ho...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > *'Not that partitioning means Kafka only provides a total order over
> > > messages within a partition. This combined with the ability to
> partition
> > > data by key is sufficient for the vast majority of applications.
> However,
> > > if you require a total order over messages this can be achieved with a
> > > topic that has only one partition, though this will mean only one
> > consumer
> > > process.'*
> > >
> > > The first word should say *NOTE*, right? Otherwise, I don't understand
> > the
> > > meaning.
> > >
> >
>
Re: bug in documentation?
Posted by Marc Labbe <mr...@gmail.com>.
while we're at it... I noticed the following typos in
section 4.1 Motivation (
http://kafka.apache.org/documentation.html#majordesignelements)
"we knew" instead of "we new"
----
Finally in cases where the stream is fed into other data systems for
serving we new the system would have to be able to guarantee
fault-tolerance in the presence of machine failures.
----
"led us" instead of "led use"
----
Supporting these uses led use to a design with a number of unique elements,
more akin to a database log then a traditional messaging system. We will
outline some elements of the design in the following sections.
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Joe Stein <jo...@stealth.ly> wrote:
> Thanks Dan, nice catch. I uploaded a patch to the documentation to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1153 once another committer +1
> it I will push the change. any feedback on my change in the JIRA is
> welcomed I think changing it to say "Kafka only provides a total order over
> ..." made sense to me in context of the rest.
>
> /*******************************************
> Joe Stein
> Founder, Principal Consultant
> Big Data Open Source Security LLC
> http://www.stealth.ly
> Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop>
> ********************************************/
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Dan Hoffman <ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > *'Not that partitioning means Kafka only provides a total order over
> > messages within a partition. This combined with the ability to partition
> > data by key is sufficient for the vast majority of applications. However,
> > if you require a total order over messages this can be achieved with a
> > topic that has only one partition, though this will mean only one
> consumer
> > process.'*
> >
> > The first word should say *NOTE*, right? Otherwise, I don't understand
> the
> > meaning.
> >
>
Re: bug in documentation?
Posted by Joe Stein <jo...@stealth.ly>.
Thanks Dan, nice catch. I uploaded a patch to the documentation to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-1153 once another committer +1
it I will push the change. any feedback on my change in the JIRA is
welcomed I think changing it to say "Kafka only provides a total order over
..." made sense to me in context of the rest.
/*******************************************
Joe Stein
Founder, Principal Consultant
Big Data Open Source Security LLC
http://www.stealth.ly
Twitter: @allthingshadoop <http://www.twitter.com/allthingshadoop>
********************************************/
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Dan Hoffman <ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *'Not that partitioning means Kafka only provides a total order over
> messages within a partition. This combined with the ability to partition
> data by key is sufficient for the vast majority of applications. However,
> if you require a total order over messages this can be achieved with a
> topic that has only one partition, though this will mean only one consumer
> process.'*
>
> The first word should say *NOTE*, right? Otherwise, I don't understand the
> meaning.
>