LadyForest commented on code in PR #24889:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/24889#discussion_r1631874007
##########
flink-table/flink-table-planner/src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/table/planner/plan/optimize/RelNodeBlock.scala:
##########
@@ -352,7 +353,14 @@ class RelNodeBlockPlanBuilder private (tableConfig:
ReadableConfig) {
object RelNodeBlockPlanBuilder {
- // It is a experimental config, will may be removed later.
+ /**
+ * Whether to treat union-all node as a breakpoint.
+ * @deprecated
+ * This configuration has been deprecated as part of FLIP-457. Please use
+ *
[[org.apache.flink.table.api.config.OptimizerConfigOptions.TABLE_OPTIMIZER_UNIONALL_AS_BREAKPOINT_ENABLED]]
+ * instead.
+ */
+ @Deprecated
Review Comment:
> IIUC, the proposed change 'Move the configurations to ...' of the FLIP
means that we can just make the move without having to keep the old positions
because we haven't changed these configuration option names, so If there are no
objections, you can remove the option from the original classes.
Yes, it's the original plan. But during the
[discussion](https://lists.apache.org/thread/n52smchwgr6qfg3tfvmxpdshk8obgor2),
Xuannan mentioned the API compatibility guarantees. The only concern is that
although there's no constraint on the Experimental API, and in theory, users
should not directly rely on table-planner in their projects, we're still
determining whether users rely on these variables in their code.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@flink.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
