HI Walker, thanks for the KIP! We definitely need this. I have two questions:
- Have you considered allowing the customization of the underlying buffer implementation? As I can see, `StreamJoined` lets you customize the underlying store via a `WindowStoreSupplier`. Would it make sense for `Joined` to have this as well? I can imagine one may want to limit the number of records in the buffer, for example. If we hit the maximum, the only option would be to drop semantic guarantees, but users may still want to do this. - With "second option on the table side" you are referring to versioned tables, right? Will the buffer on the stream side behave any different whether the table side is versioned or not? Finally, I think a simple example in the motivation section could help non-experts understand the KIP. Best, Lucas On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:13 PM Walker Carlson <wcarl...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > I have a stream proposal to improve the stream table join by adding a grace > period and buffer to the stream side of the join to allow processing in > timestamp order matching the recent improvements of the versioned tables. > > Please take a look here <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/lAs0Dw> and > share your thoughts. > > best, > Walker
