kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io>
Subject Re: [VOTE] KIP-82 Add Record Headers
Date Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:01:45 GMT
Thanks for the KIP! +1 (binding) from me. Just one nit: can we change
`Headers.header(key)` to be `Headers.lastHeader(key)`? It's not a
deal-breaker, but I think it's better to let the name reflect the actual
behavior as clearly as possible.


On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:10 AM, Jeroen van Disseldorp <jeroen@axual.io>

> +1 on introducing the concept of headers, neutral on specific
> implementation.
> On 14/02/2017 22:34, Jay Kreps wrote:
>> Couple of things I think we still need to work out:
>>     1. I think we agree about the key, but I think we haven't talked about
>>     the value yet. I think if our goal is an open ecosystem of these
>> header
>>     spread across many plugins from many systems we should consider
>> making this
>>     a string as well so it can be printed, set via a UI, set in config,
>> etc.
>>     Basically encouraging pluggable serialization formats here will lead
>> to a
>>     bit of a tower of babel.
>>     2. This proposal still includes a pretty big change to our
>> serialization
>>     and protocol definition layer. Essentially it is introducing an
>> optional
>>     type, where the format is data dependent. I think this is actually a
>> big
>>     change though it doesn't seem like it. It means you can no longer
>> specify
>>     this type with our type definition DSL, and likewise it requires
>> custom
>>     handling in client libs. This isn't a huge thing, since the Record
>>     definition is custom anyway, but I think this kind of protocol
>>     inconsistency is very non-desirable and ties you to hand-coding
>> things. I
>>     think the type should instead by [Key Value] in our BNF, where key and
>>     value are both short strings as used elsewhere. This brings it in
>> line with
>>     the rest of the protocol.
>>     3. Could we get more specific about the exact Java API change to
>>     ProducerRecord, ConsumerRecord, Record, etc?
>> -Jay
>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Michael Pearce <Michael.Pearce@ig.com>
>> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>> We would like to start the voting process for KIP-82 – Add record
>>> headers.
>>> The KIP can be found
>>> at
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-
>>> 82+-+Add+Record+Headers
>>> Discussion thread(s) can be found here:
>>> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1nSTOHTvj81?subj=
>>> Re+DISCUSS+KIP+82+Add+Record+Headers
>>> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1Arxt22Tvj81?subj=
>>> Re+DISCUSS+KIP+82+Add+Record+Headers
>>> http://search-hadoop.com/?project=Kafka&q=KIP-82
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mike
>>> The information contained in this email is strictly confidential and for
>>> the use of the addressee only, unless otherwise indicated. If you are not
>>> the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose to
>>> others
>>> this message or any attachment. Please also notify the sender by replying
>>> to this email or by telephone (+44(020 7896 0011) and then delete the
>>> email
>>> and any copies of it. Opinions, conclusion (etc) that do not relate to
>>> the
>>> official business of this company shall be understood as neither given
>>> nor
>>> endorsed by it. IG is a trading name of IG Markets Limited (a company
>>> registered in England and Wales, company number 04008957) and IG Index
>>> Limited (a company registered in England and Wales, company number
>>> 01190902). Registered address at Cannon Bridge House, 25 Dowgate Hill,
>>> London EC4R 2YA. Both IG Markets Limited (register number 195355) and IG
>>> Index Limited (register number 114059) are authorised and regulated by
>>> the
>>> Financial Conduct Authority.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message