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

Topics to tables mapping config removed in 2.0? #86

Closed
robertotena opened this issue Feb 9, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

Topics to tables mapping config removed in 2.0? #86

robertotena opened this issue Feb 9, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@robertotena
Copy link

robertotena commented Feb 9, 2021

We were trying to upgrade our connectors from version 1.6.x to 2.0, and we noticed the mapping configurations have been removed.

If I am not wrong, the change is here:
image

So if I understand correctly, in order to map a topic to a BigQuery dataset and table we need to name the topic like dataset:tablename?

So we are coupling the topic name that can have some standards to the naming of the BigQuery dataset and table? That kills any room for flexibility and impedes us upgrading.

Is there a chance we can look into this and add this feature back? What has been the reason to remove it?

@C0urante
Copy link

C0urante commented Feb 9, 2021

You can use an SMT to route topics to tables; we called this out in the upgrade notes for 2.0.0:

topicsToTables was removed. SMTs should be used route topics to tables.

You might find the RegexRouter SMT useful here; check out the documentation at https://kafka.apache.org/27/documentation.html#connect_included_transformation.

It's highly unlikely we'll be adding that feature back. This type of logic is best accomplished with an SMT.

@C0urante C0urante added the question Further information is requested label Feb 9, 2021
@C0urante
Copy link

C0urante commented Feb 9, 2021

For more context on this decision, check out wepay#245.

@robertotena
Copy link
Author

Aaah I understand now. I guess I missed it because I did not see that in the README of this project!

Maybe the Regex SMT specifically is not the best for us (as we have many different mappings), but with this approach we can tackle it from the outside.

@C0urante
Copy link

I guess I missed it because I did not see that in the README of this project!

You know, that's a fair point 😅 . I've filed #89 to track some updates to the README that we should make, including a note on the removal of the topicsToTables and datasets properties.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants