Thanks @Jark for driving the Flink Roadmap. As we discussed olap in the thread [1] and according to the suggestions from @Xingtong Song, could we add a subsection in `Towards Streaming Warehouses` or `Performance` that the short-lived query in Flink Session Cluster is one of the future directions for Flink?
Best, Shammon FY On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 8:03 PM Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you everyone for helping polish the roadmap [1]. > > I think I have addressed all the comments and we have included all ongoing > parts of Flink. > Please feel free to take a last look. I'm going to prepare the pull request > if there are no more concerns. > > Best, > Jark > > [1]: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/12BDiVKEsY-f7HI3suO_IxwzCmR04QcVqLarXgyJAb7c/edit > > On Sun, 13 Aug 2023 at 13:04, Yuan Mei <yuanmei.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Sorry for taking so long > > > > I've added a section about Flink Disaggregated State Management Evolution > > in the attached doc. > > > > I found some of the contents might be overlapped with the "large-scale > > streaming jobs". So that part might need some changes as well. > > > > Please let me know what you think. > > > > Best > > Yuan > > > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 12:07 PM Yuan Mei <yuanmei.w...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Sorry have missed this email and respond a bit late. > > > > > > I will put a draft for the long-term vision for the state as well as > > > large-scale state support into the roadmap. > > > > > > Best > > > Yuan > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:34 AM Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Jiabao, > > >> > > >> Thank you for your suggestions. I have added them to the "Going > Beyond a > > >> SQL Stream/Batch Processing Engine" and "Large-Scale State Jobs" > > sections. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Jark > > >> > > >> On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 16:06, Jiabao Sun <jiabao....@xtransfer.cn > > >> .invalid> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Thanks Jark and Martijn for driving this. > > >> > > > >> > There are two suggestions about the Table API: > > >> > > > >> > - Add the JSON type to adapt to the no sql database type. > > >> > - Remove changelog normalize operator for upsert stream. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Best, > > >> > Jiabao > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 2023年7月13日 下午3:49，Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> 写道： > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi all, > > >> > > > > >> > > Sorry for taking so long back here. > > >> > > > > >> > > Martijn and I have drafted the first version of the updated > roadmap, > > >> > > including the updated feature radar reflecting the current state > of > > >> > > different components. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/12BDiVKEsY-f7HI3suO_IxwzCmR04QcVqLarXgyJAb7c/edit > > >> > > > > >> > > Feel free to leave comments in the thread or the document. > > >> > > We may miss mentioning something important, so your help in > > enriching > > >> > > the content is greatly appreciated. > > >> > > > > >> > > Best, > > >> > > Jark & Martijn > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 00:50, Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > >> Hi Jark, > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Fair enough. Let's do it like you suggested. Thanks! > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Best regards, > > >> > >> Jing > > >> > >> > > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 6:00 PM Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > >> > > >> > >>> Hi Jing, > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> This thread is for discussing the roadmap for versions 1.18, > 2.0, > > >> and > > >> > >> even > > >> > >>> more. > > >> > >>> One of the outcomes of this discussion will be an updated > version > > of > > >> > the > > >> > >>> current roadmap. > > >> > >>> Let's work together on refining the roadmap in this thread. > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> Best, > > >> > >>> Jark > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>> On Thu, 1 Jun 2023 at 23:25, Jing Ge <j...@ververica.com.invalid > > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > >>> > > >> > >>>> Hi Jark, > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Thanks for driving it! For point 2, since we are developing > 1.18 > > >> now, > > >> > >>>> does it make sense to update the roadmap this time while we are > > >> > >> releasing > > >> > >>>> 1.18? This discussion thread will be focusing on the Flink 2.0 > > >> > roadmap, > > >> > >>> as > > >> > >>>> you mentioned previously. WDYT? > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> Best regards, > > >> > >>>> Jing > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 3:31 PM Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>>> Hi all, > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Martijn and I would like to initiate a discussion on the Flink > > >> > >> roadmap, > > >> > >>>>> which should cover the project's long-term roadmap and the > > regular > > >> > >>> update > > >> > >>>>> mechanism. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Xintong has already started a discussion about Flink 2.0 > > planning. > > >> > >> One > > >> > >>> of > > >> > >>>>> the points raised in that discussion is that we should have a > > >> > >>> high-level > > >> > >>>>> discussion of the roadmap to present where the project is > > heading > > >> > >>> (which > > >> > >>>>> doesn't necessarily need to block the Flink 2.0 planning). > > >> Moreover, > > >> > >>> the > > >> > >>>>> roadmap on the Flink website [1] hasn't been updated for half > a > > >> year, > > >> > >>> and > > >> > >>>>> the last update was for the feature radar for the 1.15 > release. > > It > > >> > >> has > > >> > >>>> been > > >> > >>>>> 2 years since the community discussed Flink's overall roadmap. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> I would like to raise two topics for discussion: > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> 1. The new roadmap. This should be an updated version of the > > >> current > > >> > >>>>> roadmap[1]. > > >> > >>>>> 2. A mechanism to regularly discuss and update the roadmap. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> To make the first topic discussion more efficient, Martijn > and I > > >> > >>>> volunteer > > >> > >>>>> to summarize the ongoing big things of different components > and > > >> > >>> present a > > >> > >>>>> roadmap draft to the community in the next few weeks. This > > should > > >> be > > >> > >> a > > >> > >>>> good > > >> > >>>>> starting point for a more detailed discussion. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Regarding the regular update mechanism, there was a proposal > in > > a > > >> > >>> thread > > >> > >>>>> [2] three years ago to make the release manager responsible > for > > >> > >>> updating > > >> > >>>>> the roadmap. However, it appears that this was not documented > > as a > > >> > >>>> release > > >> > >>>>> management task [3], and the roadmap update wasn't performed > for > > >> > >>> releases > > >> > >>>>> 1.16 and 1.17. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> In my opinion, making release managers responsible for keeping > > the > > >> > >>>> roadmap > > >> > >>>>> up to date is a good idea. Specifically, release managers of > > >> release > > >> > >> X > > >> > >>>> can > > >> > >>>>> kick off the roadmap update at the beginning of release X, > which > > >> can > > >> > >>> be a > > >> > >>>>> joint task with collecting a feature list [4]. Additionally, > > >> release > > >> > >>>>> managers of release X-1 can help verify and remove the > > >> accomplished > > >> > >>> items > > >> > >>>>> from the roadmap and update the feature radar. > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> What do you think? Do you have other ideas? > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> Best, > > >> > >>>>> Jark & Martijn > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>>> [1]: https://flink.apache.org/roadmap.html > > >> > >>>>> [2]: > > >> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/o0l3cg6yphxwrww0k7215jgtw3yfoybv > > >> > >>>>> [3]: > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Release+Management > > >> > >>>>> [4]: > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/1.18+Release > > >> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>> > > >> > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
