Hey, (Switching to my personal email)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Aljoscha is proposing keeping the public API as is, and adding some new constructors/ custom deserialization schemas as was done with Kafka. Here's what I was able to find on that feature: * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8354 * https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-connectors/flink-connector-kafka-base/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/connectors/kafka/KafkaDeserializationSchema.java * https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-connectors/flink-connector-kafka-0.11/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/connectors/kafka/FlinkKafkaConsumer011.java#L100-L114 Best, Austin On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 6:19 AM seneg...@gmail.com <seneg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > So the proposal is to keep the current RMQSource constructors / public api > as is and create new ones that gives more granular parsing ? > > Regards, > Karim Mansour > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:23 PM Austin Cawley-Edwards < > aus...@fintechstudios.com> wrote: > > > Hey all + thanks Konstantin, > > > > Like mentioned, we also run into issues with the RMQ Source > inflexibility. > > I think Aljoscha's idea of supporting both would be a nice way to > > incorporate new changes without breaking the current API. > > > > We'd definitely benefit from the changes proposed here but have another > > issue with the Correlation ID. When a message gets in the queue without a > > correlation ID, the source errors and the job cannot recover, requiring > > (painful) manual intervention. It would be nice to be able to dead-letter > > these inputs from the source, but I don't think that's possible with the > > current source interface (don't know too much about the source > specifics). > > We might be able to work around this with a custom Correlation ID > > extractor, as proposed by Karim. > > > > Also, if there are other tickets in the RMQ integrations that have gone > > unmaintained, I'm also happy to chip it at maintaining them! > > > > Best, > > Austin > > ________________________________ > > From: Konstantin Knauf <kna...@apache.org> > > Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 6:14 AM > > To: dev <dev@flink.apache.org> > > Cc: Austin Cawley-Edwards <aus...@fintechstudios.com> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] flink-connector-rabbitmq api changes > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > just looping in Austin as he mentioned that they also ran into issues due > > to the inflexibility of the RabiitMQSourcce to me yesterday. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Konstantin > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:23 AM seneg...@gmail.com<mailto: > > seneg...@gmail.com> <seneg...@gmail.com<mailto:seneg...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > Hello Guys, > > > > Thanks for all the responses, i want to stress out that i didn't feel > > ignored i just thought that i forgot an important step or something. > > > > Since i am a newbie i would follow whatever route you guys would suggest > :) > > and i agree that the RMQ connector needs a lot of love still "which i > would > > be happy to submit gradually" > > > > as for the code i have it here in the PR: > > https://github.com/senegalo/flink/pull/1 it's not that much of a change > in > > terms of logic but more of what is exposed. > > > > Let me know how you want me to proceed. > > > > Thanks again, > > Karim Mansour > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:40 AM Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org > > <mailto:aljos...@apache.org>> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I think it's good to contribute the changes to Flink directly since we > > > already have the RMQ connector in the respository. > > > > > > I would propose something similar to the Kafka connector, which takes > > > both the generic DeserializationSchema and a KafkaDeserializationSchema > > > that is specific to Kafka and allows access to the ConsumerRecord and > > > therefore all the Kafka features. What do you think about that? > > > > > > Best, > > > Aljoscha > > > > > > On 30.04.20 10:26, Robert Metzger wrote: > > > > Hey Karim, > > > > > > > > I'm sorry that you had such a bad experience contributing to Flink, > > even > > > > though you are nicely following the rules. > > > > > > > > You mentioned that you've implemented the proposed change already. > > Could > > > > you share a link to a branch here so that we can take a look? I can > > > assess > > > > the API changes easier if I see them :) > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Robert > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:09 AM Dawid Wysakowicz < > > dwysakow...@apache.org<mailto:dwysakow...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi Karim, > > > >> > > > >> Sorry you did not have the best first time experience. You certainly > > did > > > >> everything right which I definitely appreciate. > > > >> > > > >> The problem in that particular case, as I see it, is that RabbitMQ > is > > > >> not very actively maintained and therefore it is not easy too find a > > > >> committer willing to take on this topic. The point of connectors not > > > >> being properly maintained was raised a few times in the past on the > > ML. > > > >> One of the ideas how to improve the situation there was to start a > > > >> https://flink-packages.org/ page. The idea is to ask active users > of > > > >> certain connectors to maintain those connectors outside of the core > > > >> project, while giving them a platform within the community where > they > > > >> can make their modules visible. That way it is possible to overcome > > the > > > >> lack of capabilities within the core committers without loosing much > > on > > > >> the visibility. > > > >> > > > >> I would kindly ask you to consider that path, if you are interested. > > You > > > >> can of course also wait/reach out to more committers if you feel > > strong > > > >> about contributing those changes back to the Flink repository > itself. > > > >> > > > >> Best, > > > >> > > > >> Dawid > > > >> > > > >> On 30/04/2020 07:29, seneg...@gmail.com<mailto:seneg...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >>> Hello, > > > >>> > > > >>> I am new to the mailing list and to contributing in Big opensource > > > >> projects > > > >>> in general and i don't know if i did something wrong or should be > > more > > > >>> patient :) > > > >>> > > > >>> I put a topic for discussion as per the contribution guide " > > > >>> https://flink.apache.org/contributing/how-to-contribute.html"; > > almost a > > > >> week > > > >>> ago and since what i propose is not backward compatible it needs to > > be > > > >>> discussed here before opening a ticket and moving forward. > > > >>> > > > >>> So my question is. Will someone pick the discussion up ? or at > least > > > >>> someone would say that this is not the way to go ? or should i > assume > > > >> from > > > >>> the silence that it's not important / relevant to the project ? > > Should > > > i > > > >>> track the author of the connector and send him directly ? > > > >>> > > > >>> Thank you for your time. > > > >>> > > > >>> Regards, > > > >>> Karim Mansour > > > >>> > > > >>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 11:17 AM seneg...@gmail.com<mailto: > > seneg...@gmail.com> < > > > seneg...@gmail.com<mailto:seneg...@gmail.com>> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Dear All, > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I want to propose a change to the current RabbitMQ connector. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Currently the RMQSource is extracting the body of the message > which > > > is a > > > >>>> byte array and pass it to a an instance of a user implementation > of > > > the > > > >>>> DeserializationSchema class to deserialize the body of the > message. > > It > > > >>>> also uses the correlation id from the message properties to > > > deduplicate > > > >> the > > > >>>> message. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> What i want to propose is instead of taking a implementation of a > > > >>>> DeserializationSchema in the RMQSource constructor, actually have > > the > > > >>>> user implement an interface that would have methods both the > output > > > for > > > >> the > > > >>>> RMQSource and the correlation id used not only from the body of > the > > > >> message > > > >>>> but also to it's metadata and properties thus giving the connector > > > much > > > >>>> more power and flexibility. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> This of course would mean a breaking API change for the RMQSource > > > since > > > >> it > > > >>>> will no longer take a DeserializationSchema but an implementation > > of a > > > >>>> predefined interface that has the methods to extract both the > output > > > of > > > >> the > > > >>>> RMQSource and the to extract the unique message id as well. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> The reason behind that is that in my company we were relaying on > > > another > > > >>>> property the message id for deduplication of the messages and i > also > > > >> needed > > > >>>> that information further down the pipeline and there was > absolutely > > no > > > >> way > > > >>>> of getting it other than modifying the RMQSource. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I already have code written but as the rules dictates i have to > run > > it > > > >> by > > > >>>> you guys first before i attempt to create a Jira ticket :) > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Let me know what you think. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Regards, > > > >>>> Karim Mansour > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Konstantin Knauf > > > > https://twitter.com/snntrable > > > > https://github.com/knaufk > > >
