Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Shaded AsyncHttpClient in pulsar client #390

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 1, 2017

Conversation

jai1
Copy link
Contributor

@jai1 jai1 commented Apr 28, 2017

Motivation

Want to shade the asynchttpclient in pulsar-client-java since one of our customers want to use their own version of asynchttpclient. (Issue #389)

Modifications

Added asynchttpclient to maven shade plugin and created a custom properties file which is a replica on the default properties with class name shaded.

Result

We are able to provide pulsar-client-shaded.jar with asynchttpclient shaded.

@jai1 jai1 added this to the 1.18 milestone Apr 28, 2017
@jai1 jai1 self-assigned this Apr 28, 2017
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
com.yahoo.pulsar.shade.org.asynchttpclient.threadPoolName=AsyncHttpClient
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you add a comment here explaining what's the purpose of this file? Same thing that you explain in the description

Copy link
Contributor

@merlimat merlimat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

@merlimat merlimat merged commit c4d2e8b into apache:master May 1, 2017
@jai1 jai1 deleted the ShadingHTTPClient branch May 16, 2017 06:17
hangc0276 pushed a commit to hangc0276/pulsar that referenced this pull request May 26, 2021
Currently KoP created `__consumer_offsets` repeatedly, the `ConflictException` will be thrown after apache#9342. Though it doesn't affect the usage because the `ConflictException` is treated as the concurrent issue and will be swallowed, it could cause some unnecessary logs. So this PR remove the redundant partition creation code.

Another issue is that when `__consumer_offsets` already exists, the existed partition will be created because the partition returned by broker contains `persistent://` prefix but the topics in `offsetPartitionSet` don't. This PR use `KopTopic` to avoid the topic name dismatch.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants