Thanks Jane for following up on this issue!

+1 for adding it back first.

Supporting emitUpdateWithRetract for TableAggregateFunction is a good
feature, we should support it unless there are better alternatives.


Best,
Feng

On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:01 PM Lincoln Lee <lincoln.8...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks to Jane for following up on this issue!  +1 for adding it back
> first.
>
> For the deprecation, considering that users aren't usually motivated to
> upgrade to a major version (1.14, from two years ago, wasn't that old,
> which may be
> part of the reason for not receiving more feedback), I'd recommend holding
> off on removing `TableAggregateFunction` until we have a replacement for
> it,
> e.g., user-defined-operator as Jark mentioned or something else.
>
> Best,
> Lincoln Lee
>
>
> Best,
> Lincoln Lee
>
>
> Jark Wu <imj...@gmail.com> 于2023年9月7日周四 21:30写道:
>
> > +1 to fix it first.
> >
> > I also agree to deprecate it if there are few people using it,
> > but this should be another discussion thread within dev+user ML.
> >
> > In the future, we are planning to introduce user-defined-operator
> > based on the TVF functionality which I think can fully subsume
> > the UDTAG, cc @Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org>.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jark
> >
> > On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 11:44, Jane Chan <qingyue....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi devs,
> > >
> > > Recently, we noticed an issue regarding a feature regression related to
> > > Table API. `org.apache.flink.table.functions.TableAggregateFunction`
> > > provides an API `emitUpdateWithRetract` [1] to cope with updated
> values,
> > > but it's not being called in the code generator. As a result, even if
> > users
> > > override this method, it does not work as intended.
> > >
> > > This issue has been present since version 1.15 (when the old planner
> was
> > > deprecated), but surprisingly, only two users have raised concerns
> about
> > it
> > > [2][3].
> > >
> > > So, I would like to initiate a discussion to bring it back. Of course,
> if
> > > few users use it, we can also consider deprecating it.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/dev/table/functions/udfs/#retraction-example
> > > [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/rnvw8k3636dqhdttpmf1c9colbpw9svp
> > > [3]
> https://www.mail-archive.com/user-zh@flink.apache.org/msg15230.html
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Jane
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to