It was around about then that I figured out that Confluent was a bunch of kids playing at building stuff. I have zero doubt that it's a good base if you have an enormous firehose of data, but look for features beyond raw performance and basic correctness, and it's underdeveloped. Basic stuff like back-pressure - don't expect it, either overallocate your storage or make sure you always have faster consumers than producers.
It'll be the MySQL end if it's a Connect source as opposed to sink.
Two options - in your Connect config, you can specify a topic prefix, or if you use a custom query, the topic prefix will be used as the entire topic name.
> It was around about then that I figured out that Confluent was a bunch of kids playing at building stuff.
Kafka Connect saved me writing a load of boilerplate to monitor a PG database to propagate model updates in a medium suitable for streaming jobs - Kafka Connect + Kafka Streaming's Global KTables is a nice fit, even if the Connect JDBC end is somewhat beta at this point (KTables rely on Kafka message key for identity, the JDBC source doesn't populate it by default, so you have to use Single Message Transforms (SMTs) to achieve it)
I'd say beta, not kids.
re: the point about backpressure, there are plenty of cases where you don't want backpressure. If you want the thing that's producing data to keep humming along even if some downstream app (lets say Connect dumping the data into HDFS for some downstream batch analytics), you don't want to see backpressure. In Kafka you should just define your retention period to be long enough to cover any slowness/lag in consumer applications -- it's pretty fundamental to its design and use cases that it doesn't have explicit backpressure from consumers back to producers. (You do get backpressure from a single broker back to the producer via the TCP connection, but I assume you meant from consumer back to producer.)