Hi All, Thank Aljoscha for further spitting up topics.
I will start separate threads on each topic which you propose. Best, Haibo Aljoscha Krettek-2 wrote > Hi All, > > this is a great discussion! (I have some thoughts on most of the topics > but I'll wait for the separate discussion threads) > > @Haibo Will you start a separate threads? I think the separate discussion > topics would be (based on Stephans mail but further split up): > > 1. What should the API stack look like? > 2. What should the interface for a single operator look like, i.e. what > will StreamOperator look like? > 3. What does a job look like, i.e. the graph of operations. Maybe a proper > serialized format for DAGs. > 4. Modules and dependency structure. This is currently a bit messed up for > flink-streaming, which depends on flink-runtime > 5. What's special for batch. > > There's some interdependencies, i.e. 2 depends on 5. and maybe 1. > > Best, > Aljoscha > >> On 7. Dec 2018, at 10:00, Shuai Xu < > chiggics@ > > wrote: >> >> Hi all >> Glad to see the discussion, we are now designing to enhance the >> scheduling >> of batch job, a unified api will help a lot. >> >> Haibo Sun < > sunhaibotb@ > > 于2018年12月5日周三 下午4:45写道： >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Thank Kurt, you see more benefits of the unification than I do. >>> >>> I quite agree Kurt's views. DataStream, DataSet and Table are remained >>> independent for now, and subsumed DataSet in data stream in the future. >>> The >>> collection execution mode is replaced by mini cluster. The high-level >>> semantic APIs have their own optimizations, but StreamTransformation >>> does >>> not. >>> >>> About iterations, I have not more ideas at the moment. >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> Haibo >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: >>> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/ >>> -- Sent from: http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/
