-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 594
HDDS-13513. Ozone Event Notification (Feature Branch) #9336
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
base: HDDS-13513_Event_Notification_FeatureBranch
Are you sure you want to change the base?
HDDS-13513. Ozone Event Notification (Feature Branch) #9336
Conversation
The intent is that implementations of these plugins would read from the ledger of completed events and publish event notifications (e.g. via kafka)
|
This PR has been marked as stale due to 21 days of inactivity. Please comment or remove the stale label to keep it open. Otherwise, it will be automatically closed in 7 days. |
|
Hi @gardenia should we leave this PR open, or focus on the smaller split PRs? |
@errose28 - the split PRs pretty much obsolete this. So please focus on the split PRs as it is ultimately the same content (albeit broken down into logical steps). Incidentally the split PRs have a an incremental ordering which is reflected by their creation order: |
|
Thanks, I'll close this one for now then. We can re-open it at any time if needed. |
|
This PR has been marked as stale due to 21 days of inactivity. Please comment or remove the stale label to keep it open. Otherwise, it will be automatically closed in 7 days. |
|
This PR has been marked as stale due to 21 days of inactivity. Please comment or remove the stale label to keep it open. Otherwise, it will be automatically closed in 7 days. |
Please describe your PR in detail:
A rough draft implementation of this outline in the design doc: #8871 (comment)
NOTE: This PR is not intended to be ready for merging but is being shared as a way to get early feedback on the gist of the approach and help drive the discussion of the design (#8871) There are many TODOs, rough edges and things that need to be fleshed out.
There are 2 logical parts:
The current CompletedRequestInfo schema is minimal:
The use of "optional" for the arguments was based on feedback from the community call where @errose28 made the point that the previous sketch of a schema (using a freeform Map<String, String>) did not jibe well with schema management and this optional pattern had been used in other places to get around that.
TODO:
What is the link to the Apache JIRA
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-5984
How was this patch tested?
unit tests, manual tests (docker compose)