Depends on how "real time" the scenario is.
I think sending it only once during a window might work for some use cases.
If my understanding is correct, this essentially stalls the processing of a
window until the meta data is available which is not until end window of
the upstream operator.

Thanks
-Bhupesh


On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Gaurav Gupta <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Bhupesh,
>
> If the requirement is to send meta data with every tuple then it should be
> send with data schema itself.
> Can sending meta data be optimized the way platform does with
> DefaultStatefulStreamCodec. I mean send the meta data only once in a window
> and all the tuples that are associated with this meta data have this meta
> data’s id.
>
> Thanks
> - Gaurav
>
> > On Nov 17, 2015, at 8:20 PM, Bhupesh Chawda <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > In the design of input modules, we are facing situations where we might
> > need to pass on some meta data to the downstream modules, in addition to
> > actual data. Further, this meta data may need to be sent per record. An
> > example use case is to send a record and additionally send the file name
> > (as meta data) from which the record was read. Another example is sending
> > out the kafka topic information along with the message.
> >
> > We are exploring options on:
> >
> >   1. Whether to include the meta information in the data schema, so as to
> >   allow the parser to handle this data as regular data. This will involve
> >   changing the schema of the data.
> >   2. Whether to handle meta data separately and modify the behaviour of
> >   parser / converter to handle meta data separately as well.
> >   3. Use additional ports to transfer such meta data depending on
> >   different modules.
> >   4. Any other option
> >
> > Please comment.
> >
> > Consolidating comments on another thread here:
> >
> >   1. Have the tuple containing two parts, with the downstream parser
> >   ignoring the meta data
> >   1. Data
> >   2. Meta-data
> >   2. Use option 1, but concern regarding how unifiers will treat meta
> >   data, if they need to unify that as well.
> >   3. Another comment is to have a centralized meta data repo. This may be
> >   in memory as well, may be as a separate operator which stores and
> serves
> >   the meta data to other operators.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -Bhupesh
>
>

Reply via email to