Hi all, I think we should focus to discuss the document in [DISCUSS] thread and keep this vote thread purely for voting.
Otherwise, it's hard for others to collect feedbacks for this topic. Best, Kurt On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 5:51 PM Terry Wang <zjuwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Rui~ > What you suggested makes sense, remove description and detailed > description from `DESCRIBE DATABASE`. > Open to more comments and votes :) > > Best, > Terry Wang > > > > > 2019年11月7日 17:15，Rui Li <lirui.fu...@gmail.com> 写道： > > > > I see, thanks for the clarification. In current implementation, it seems > > just a duplicate of comment. So I'd prefer not to display it for DESCRIBE > > DATABASE, because 1) users have no control over the content and 2) it's > > totally redundant. We can add it in the future when we come up with > > something more meaningful. What do you think? > > > > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 3:54 PM Terry Wang <zjuwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi Rui~ > >> > >> Description of the database is obtained from > >> `CatalogDatabase#getDescription()` method, which is implement by > >> CatalogDatebaseImpl. Users don’t need to specify the description. > >> > >> Best, > >> Terry Wang > >> > >> > >> > >>> 2019年11月7日 15:40，Rui Li <lirui.fu...@gmail.com> 写道： > >>> > >>> Thanks Terry for driving this forward. > >>> Got one question about DESCRIBE DATABASE: the results display comment > and > >>> description of a database. While comment can be specified when a > database > >>> is created, I don't see how users can specify description of the > >> database? > >>> > >>> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 4:16 AM Bowen Li <bowenl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Thanks. > >>>> > >>>> As Terry and I discussed offline yesterday, we added a new section to > >>>> explain the detailed implementation plan. > >>>> > >>>> +1 (binding) from me. > >>>> > >>>> Bowen > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 6:33 PM Terry Wang <zjuwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Bowen: > >>>>> Thanks for your feedback. > >>>>> Your opinion convinced me and I just remove the section about catalog > >>>>> create statement and also remove `DBPROPERTIES` `PROPERTIES` from > alter > >>>>> DDLs. > >>>>> Open to more comments or votes :) ! > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> Terry Wang > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> 2019年11月6日 07:22，Bowen Li <bowenl...@gmail.com> 写道： > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Terry, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I went over the FLIP in detail again. The FLIP mostly LGTM. A couple > >>>>> issues: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - since we on't plan to support catalog ddl, can you remove them > from > >>>> the > >>>>>> FLIP? > >>>>>> - I found there are some discrepancies in proposed database and > table > >>>>> DDLs. > >>>>>> For db ddl, the create db syntax proposes specifying k-v properties > >>>>>> following "WITH". However, alter db ddl comes with a keyword > >>>>> "DBPROPERTIES": > >>>>>> > >>>>>> CREATE DATABASE [ IF NOT EXISTS ] [ catalogName.] dataBaseName [ > >>>> COMMENT > >>>>>> database_comment ] > >>>>>> [*WITH *( name=value [, name=value]*)] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ALTER DATABASE [ catalogName.] dataBaseName SET *DBPROPERTIES* ( > >>>>>> name=value [, name=value]*) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> IIUIC, are you borrowing syntax from Hive? Note that Hive's db > >>>> create > >>>>>> ddl comes with "DBPROPERTIES" though - "CREATE (DATABASE|SCHEMA) [IF > >>>> NOT > >>>>>> EXISTS] database_name ... [*WITH DBPROPERTIES* (k=v, ...)];" [1] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The same applies to table ddl. The proposed alter table ddl comes > >>>> with > >>>>>> "SET *PROPERTIES* (...)", however, Flink's existing table create ddl > >>>>> since > >>>>>> 1.9 [2] doesn't have "PROPERTIES" keyword. As opposed to Hive's > >> syntax, > >>>>>> both create and alter table ddl comes with "TBLPROPERTIES" [1]. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I feel it's better to be consistent among our DDLs. One option is to > >>>>>> just remove the "PROPERTIES" and "DBPROPERTIES" keywords in proposed > >>>>> syntax. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] > >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/LanguageManual+DDL > >>>>>> [2] > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/table/sql.html#specifying-a-ddl > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 12:54 PM Peter Huang < > >>>> huangzhenqiu0...@gmail.com> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> +1 for the enhancement. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:04 AM Xuefu Z <usxu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> +1 to the long missing feature in Flink SQL. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 6:32 AM Terry Wang <zjuwa...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I would like to start the vote for FLIP-69[1] which is discussed > >> and > >>>>>>>>> reached consensus in the discussion thread[2]. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. I'll try to close it > >> by > >>>>>>>>> 2019-11-08 14:30 UTC, unless there is an objection or not enough > >>>>> votes. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [1] > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP+69+-+Flink+SQL+DDL+Enhancement > >>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP+69+-+Flink+SQL+DDL+Enhancement > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> [2] > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-FLIP-69-Flink-SQL-DDL-Enhancement-td33090.html > >>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-FLIP-69-Flink-SQL-DDL-Enhancement-td33090.html > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>> Terry Wang > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> Xuefu Zhang > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "In Honey We Trust!" > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Best regards! > >>> Rui Li > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Best regards! > > Rui Li > >
