I remember this conversation popping up a few times already and I'm in general a big fan of removing BucketingSink.
However, until now there were a few features lacking in StreamingFileSink that are present in BucketingSink and that are being actively used (I can't exactly remember them now, but I can look it up if everyone else is also suffering from bad memory). Did we manage to add them in the meantime? If not, then it feels rushed to remove it at this point. On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 2:33 PM Kostas Kloudas <kklou...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Chesnay Schepler Off the top of my head, I cannot find an easy way > to migrate from the BucketingSink to the StreamingFileSink. It may be > possible but it will require some effort because the logic would be > "read the old state, commit it, and start fresh with the > StreamingFileSink." > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 2:09 PM Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > On 13.10.20 14:01, David Anderson wrote: > > > I thought this was waiting on FLIP-46 -- Graceful Shutdown Handling -- > and > > > in fact, the StreamingFileSink is mentioned in that FLIP as a > motivating > > > use case. > > > > Ah yes, I see FLIP-147 as a more general replacement for FLIP-46. Thanks > > for the reminder, we should close FLIP-46 now with an explanatory > > message to avoid confusion. > -- Arvid Heise | Senior Java Developer <https://www.ververica.com/> Follow us @VervericaData -- Join Flink Forward <https://flink-forward.org/> - The Apache Flink Conference Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time -- Ververica GmbH | Invalidenstrasse 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany -- Ververica GmbH Registered at Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 158244 B Managing Directors: Timothy Alexander Steinert, Yip Park Tung Jason, Ji (Toni) Cheng
