Github user rtudoran commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3590#discussion_r107664558
--- Diff:
flink-libraries/flink-table/src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/table/plan/nodes/datastream/DataStreamOverAggregate.scala
---
@@ -119,6 +150,57 @@ class DataStreamOverAggregate(
}
+ def createTimeBoundedProcessingTimeOverWindow(inputDS: DataStream[Row]):
DataStream[Row] = {
+
+ val overWindow: Group = logicWindow.groups.get(0)
+ val partitionKeys: Array[Int] = overWindow.keys.toArray
+ val namedAggregates: Seq[CalcitePair[AggregateCall, String]] =
generateNamedAggregates
+
+ val index =
overWindow.lowerBound.getOffset.asInstanceOf[RexInputRef].getIndex
+ val count = input.getRowType().getFieldCount()
+ val lowerboundIndex = index - count
+
+
+ val time_boundary =
logicWindow.constants.get(lowerboundIndex).getValue2 match {
+ case _: java.math.BigDecimal =>
logicWindow.constants.get(lowerboundIndex)
+ .getValue2.asInstanceOf[java.math.BigDecimal].longValue()
+ case _ => throw new TableException("OVER Window boundaries must be
numeric")
+ }
+
+ // get the output types
+ val rowTypeInfo =
FlinkTypeFactory.toInternalRowTypeInfo(getRowType).asInstanceOf[RowTypeInfo]
+
+ val result: DataStream[Row] =
+ // partitioned aggregation
+ if (partitionKeys.nonEmpty) {
+
+ val processFunction =
AggregateUtil.CreateTimeBoundedProcessingOverProcessFunction(
+ namedAggregates,
+ inputType,
+ time_boundary)
+
+ inputDS
+ .keyBy(partitionKeys: _*)
+ .process(processFunction)
+ .returns(rowTypeInfo)
+ .name(aggOpName)
+ .asInstanceOf[DataStream[Row]]
+ } else { // non-partitioned aggregation
+ val processFunction =
AggregateUtil.CreateTimeBoundedProcessingOverProcessFunction(
--- End diff --
@fhueske even if there is this optimization for one case you cannot make
such an assumption when you would implement a top operation. So you would still
sort.
I do not know the reason for all these changes ..But if I learned
something over the last changes is that eventually is still going for
reimplementing...so I am not sure it is worth arguing for our option.
Let me know what is the prefered option
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
