[GitHub] [kafka] mjsax commented on a diff in pull request #12293: KAFKA-13963: Clarified java doc for processors api

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

mjsax commented on code in PR #12293:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/12293#discussion_r897429237


##########
streams/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/streams/TopologyDescription.java:
##########
@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
  * In contrast, two sub-topologies are not connected but can be linked to each other via topics, i.e., if one
  * sub-topology {@link Topology#addSink(String, String, String...) writes} into a topic and another sub-topology
  * {@link Topology#addSource(String, String...) reads} from the same topic.
+ * Processors and Transformers created with the Processor API are treated as black boxes and are not represented in the topology graph.

Review Comment:
   > are not represented
   
   Sounds a little bit like "missing". Also, using the (plain) Processor API, there are only `Processors` anyway -- `Transformers` are part of the DSL-PAPI-integration.
   
   If you use the Processor API, you would still connect Processors to define your graph (eg, `addProcessor(..., <parentProcessor>)`  and those connections are represented in the `TopologyDescription`.
   
   The point from the jira was (if I understood it correctly), that `context.forward()` (which does not define the actually structure of the topology, as it does not connect `Processor` but just uses _existing_ connections) is not part of the `TopologyDescription`.



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: jira-unsubscribe@kafka.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org