+1

This is a very good idea.

Best,
Jark

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 10:43, Xingbo Huang <hxbks...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> This is a very good proposal.In release-1.12, many newly added features are
> only supported on the blink planner. For example, the newly added features
> of PyFlnk in FLIP-137[1] and FLIP-139[2] are only available on the blink
> planner.
>
> [1]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-137%3A+Support+Pandas+UDAF+in+PyFlink
> [2]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-139%3A+General+Python+User-Defined+Aggregate+Function+Support+on+Table+API
>
> Best,
> Xingbo
>
> Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com> 于2020年12月9日周三 上午9:46写道:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Very good proposal, blink planner has been the default planner since
> Flink
> > 1.11.0, and many new features are not supported in legacy planner.
> >
> > Best,
> > Leonard
> >
> > > 在 2020年12月9日,05:15,Arvid Heise <ar...@ververica.com> 写道:
> > >
> > > +1, add a small info box about legacy planner and point to 1.11 doc
> > > (nothing should have changed)
> > >
> > > Ideally, "legacy" and "blink" does not appear anywhere in the doc
> (except
> > > for that info box)
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 6:35 PM Marta Paes Moreira <ma...@ververica.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1, this is confusing (esp. for new users) and also creates more and
> > more
> > >> "annotation clutter" as new features are added.
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 5:30 PM Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>> Yes, please!
> > >>>
> > >>> On 08.12.20 16:52, David Anderson wrote:
> > >>>> I agree -- I think separating out the legacy planner info should
> make
> > >>>> things clearer for everyone, and then some day we can simply drop
> it.
> > >>> Plus,
> > >>>> doing it now will make it easier to make improvements to the docs
> > going
> > >>>> forward.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> David
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 4:38 PM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi Seth,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> this is a very good idea. We might not be able to remove the legacy
> > >>>>> planner immediately but at least we can make the docs easier for
> > >> current
> > >>>>> and future users of the Blink planner.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Making the SQL docs Blink-only with a dedicated legacy planner page
> > >>>>> sounds good to me.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>> Timo
> > >>>>> On 08.12.20 16:36, Seth Wiesman wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi Everyone,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I've been spending a lot of time recently working on the SQL
> > >>>>> documentation
> > >>>>>> and I'm finding it very difficult to explain semantics as the two
> > >> table
> > >>>>>> planners continue to diverge. As Blink has been the default
> planner
> > >> for
> > >>>>>> some time, and 1.12 now offers bounded data stream support, how
> does
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> community feel about making the documentation "blink only"?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We would update the documentation to assume users are always using
> > >> the
> > >>>>>> Blink planner. As the legacy planner still exists we would create
> a
> > >>>>>> dedicated legacy planner page for users that have not migrated for
> > >>>>> whatever
> > >>>>>> reason - likely dataset interop. On this page, we would clearly
> list
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> features that are not supported by the legacy planner and any
> > >> semantics
> > >>>>>> that differ from the Blink planner.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Seth
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > 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
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to