Re: Random Partitioning Issue
I just took a look at this change. I agree with Joe, not to put to fine a
point on it, but this is a confusing hack.
Jun, I don't think wanting to minimizing the number of TCP connections is
going to be a very common need for people with less than 10k producers. I
also don't think people are going to get very good load balancing out of
this because most people don't have a ton of producers. I think instead we
will spend the next year explaining this behavior which 99% of people will
think is a bug (because it is crazy, non-intuitive, and breaks their usage).
Why was this done by adding special default behavior in the null key case
instead of as a partitioner? The argument that the partitioner interface
doesn't have sufficient information to choose a partition is not a good
argument for hacking in changes to the default, it is an argument for *
improving* the partitioner interface.
The whole point of a partitioner interface is to make it possible to plug
in non-standard behavior like this, right?
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Jun Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: