[improve][pip] PIP-321 Introduce allowed-cluster at the namespace level

[liangyepianzhou]

Motivation

According to the introduction on our official website, geo-replication can be enabled at the namespace level or topic level.
But in the current implementation, creating producer and consumer will check if the cluster is configured in the namespace policy instead of the topic policy. So if replication is only enabled at the topic level, the replicator will connect fail when creating a producer.

pulsar/pulsar-broker/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/broker/admin/AdminResource.java

Lines 480 to 497 in b949187

	protected CompletableFuture<PartitionedTopicMetadata> getPartitionedTopicMetadataAsync(
	TopicName topicName, boolean authoritative, boolean checkAllowAutoCreation) {
	// validates global-namespace contains local/peer cluster: if peer/local cluster present then lookup can
	// serve/redirect request else fail partitioned-metadata-request so, client fails while creating
	// producer/consumer
	return validateClusterOwnershipAsync(topicName.getCluster())
	.thenCompose(__ -> validateGlobalNamespaceOwnershipAsync(topicName.getNamespaceObject()))
	.thenCompose(__ -> validateTopicOperationAsync(topicName, TopicOperation.LOOKUP))
	.thenCompose(__ -> {
	if (checkAllowAutoCreation) {
	return pulsar().getBrokerService()
	.fetchPartitionedTopicMetadataCheckAllowAutoCreationAsync(topicName);
	} else {
	return pulsar().getBrokerService().fetchPartitionedTopicMetadataAsync(topicName);
	}
	});
	}

2023-11-12T23:00:21,915 - WARN  - [pulsar-io-105-5:PulsarWebResource@915] - Namespace missing local cluster name in clusters list: local_cluster=r2 ns=pulsar/testEnableReplicationInTopicLevel-479d54e6-5b63-4218-8af9-3bca99ffba44 clusters=[r1]
2023-11-12T23:00:21,916 - WARN  - [pulsar-io-105-5:ServerCnx@593] - Failed to get Partitioned Metadata [/127.0.0.1:52961] persistent://pulsar/testEnableReplicationInTopicLevel-479d54e6-5b63-4218-8af9-3bca99ffba44/__change_events: Namespace missing local cluster name in clusters list: local_cluster=r2 ns=pulsar/testEnableReplicationInTopicLevel-479d54e6-5b63-4218-8af9-3bca99ffba44 clusters=[r1]
org.apache.pulsar.broker.web.RestException: Namespace missing local cluster name in clusters list: local_cluster=r2 ns=pulsar/testEnableReplicationInTopicLevel-479d54e6-5b63-4218-8af9-3bca99ffba44 clusters=[r1]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.web.PulsarWebResource.lambda$checkLocalOrGetPeerReplicationCluster$27(PulsarWebResource.java:916) ~[classes/:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniAcceptNow(CompletableFuture.java:757) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniAcceptStage(CompletableFuture.java:735) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.thenAccept(CompletableFuture.java:2182) ~[?:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.web.PulsarWebResource.lambda$checkLocalOrGetPeerReplicationCluster$29(PulsarWebResource.java:906) ~[classes/:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniAcceptNow(CompletableFuture.java:757) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniAcceptStage(CompletableFuture.java:735) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.thenAccept(CompletableFuture.java:2182) ~[?:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.web.PulsarWebResource.checkLocalOrGetPeerReplicationCluster(PulsarWebResource.java:890) ~[classes/:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.web.PulsarWebResource.checkLocalOrGetPeerReplicationClusterAtTopicLevel(PulsarWebResource.java:950) ~[classes/:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.admin.impl.PersistentTopicsBase.unsafeGetPartitionedTopicMetadataAsync(PersistentTopicsBase.java:4382) ~[classes/:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.ServerCnx.lambda$handlePartitionMetadataRequest$7(ServerCnx.java:581) ~[classes/:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniApplyNow(CompletableFuture.java:684) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.uniApplyStage(CompletableFuture.java:662) ~[?:?]
	at java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.thenApply(CompletableFuture.java:2168) ~[?:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.broker.service.ServerCnx.handlePartitionMetadataRequest(ServerCnx.java:578) ~[classes/:?]
	at org.apache.pulsar.common.protocol.PulsarDecoder.channelRead(PulsarDecoder.java:134)

---

Why Does This Situation Occur and the Associated Modifications

1. PIP-8 Introduce peer cluster for global namespace redirection
   Validation on PartitionedMetadata-Lookup: Fail request if global namespace's replication-clusters doesn't contain current/peer-clusters (Earlier this validation was only present at lookup only). So, client can't create producer/consumer object and doesn't do internal retry for lookup.
2. Support for setting geo-replication clusters on topic level #12136 Support for setting geo-replication clusters on topic level
   This PR supports the configuration of geo-replication at the topic level.
   However, this PR's test only included tests for policy change, and there was no test to see if replication could work normally if only enabled on the topic level.

Modifications

Use replication-clusters, allowed-clusters to replace a single replication-clusters originally in the namespace policy.
See more explanation in the proposal.

Verifying this change

• Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

• Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (10MB)
• Extended integration test for recovery after broker failure

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

If the box was checked, please highlight the changes

• Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
• The public API
• The schema
• The default values of configurations
• The threading model
• The binary protocol
• The REST endpoints
• The admin CLI options
• The metrics
• Anything that affects deployment

Documentation

• doc
• doc-required
• doc-not-needed
• doc-complete

Matching PR in forked repository

PR in forked repository:

[asafm]

@Technoboy- Your comments will highly appreciated in the discussion of this PIP in the mailing list.

[Technoboy-]

@Technoboy- Your comments will highly appreciated in the discussion of this PIP in the mailing list.

Replied

Need to confirm the if the last step in PIP-8 is required.