Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
+1 to revert this breaking change and include it to 1.18.1 Best, Leonard > 2023年12月8日 下午4:14，Jing Ge 写道： > > Hi all, > > FYI: the 1.18.1 release discussion thread: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/1sjmn3lj32rrqmdmqom43hr2c34qczvw > Look forward to your feedback. Thanks! > > Best regards, > Jing > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 8:51 AM Jing Ge wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> +1 for reverting it. >> >> I'd like to volunteer as the release manager of 1.18.1 and will send the >> discussion email for the 1.18 release asap. >> >> Best regards, >> Jing >> >> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 1:26 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> +1 for reverting it. >>> >>> Also, I’m not sure should we release 1.18.1 as soon as possible after it’s >>> merged. If I understand correctly, users cannot upgrade flink job from >>> 1.18.0 to 1.18.1 directly if we reverting it in 1.18.1, right? >>> >>> If so, it’s better to release 1.18.1 asap, and try to avoid users to use a >>> wrong Data type. >>> Looking forward to hearing from you, thank you. >>> >>> Best, >>> Rui >>> >>> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 00:28, Xingcan Cui wrote: >>> Hi, Thanks for bringing this up, Peter. I'm +1 for reverting the change. Best, Xingcan On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:40 AM Martijn Visser < >>> martijnvis...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > Agree with what has been said already. I've marked > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket > for 1.18.1 > > Best regards, > > Martijn > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi < >>> balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. >> >> Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best >>> if we >> could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. >> >> On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: >> >>> Hi Peter, Timo >>>Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a breaking >>> change. >>> I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 >>> >>> Regards, >>> aitozi >>> >>> Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： >>> Hi Peter, thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a > serious issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many > related utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. Regards, Timo On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > Hi Team, > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from >>> 1.17 > to 1.18, > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph > created a jira > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > In a nutshell: > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > - Run a select which returns this column > - The return type changes: > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will > break >>> some > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding >>> this > independently [3]. > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > - Do we want to revert the change? > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior >>> configurable? > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > Thanks, > Peter > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - > DataTypeHint > don't support Row> > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL >>> primitive > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > >>> > >>> >>
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi all, FYI: the 1.18.1 release discussion thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/1sjmn3lj32rrqmdmqom43hr2c34qczvw Look forward to your feedback. Thanks! Best regards, Jing On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 8:51 AM Jing Ge wrote: > Hi all, > > +1 for reverting it. > > I'd like to volunteer as the release manager of 1.18.1 and will send the > discussion email for the 1.18 release asap. > > Best regards, > Jing > > On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 1:26 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> +1 for reverting it. >> >> Also, I’m not sure should we release 1.18.1 as soon as possible after it’s >> merged. If I understand correctly, users cannot upgrade flink job from >> 1.18.0 to 1.18.1 directly if we reverting it in 1.18.1, right? >> >> If so, it’s better to release 1.18.1 asap, and try to avoid users to use a >> wrong Data type. >> Looking forward to hearing from you, thank you. >> >> Best, >> Rui >> >> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 00:28, Xingcan Cui wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Thanks for bringing this up, Peter. I'm +1 for reverting the change. >> > >> > Best, >> > Xingcan >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:40 AM Martijn Visser < >> martijnvis...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi all, >> > > >> > > Agree with what has been said already. I've marked >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket >> > > for 1.18.1 >> > > >> > > Best regards, >> > > >> > > Martijn >> > > >> > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi < >> balassi.mar...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. >> > > > >> > > > Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best >> if >> > we >> > > > could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Hi Peter, Timo >> > > > > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a >> > breaking >> > > > > change. >> > > > > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 >> > > > > >> > > > > Regards, >> > > > > aitozi >> > > > > >> > > > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： >> > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Peter, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a >> > > serious >> > > > > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many >> > > related >> > > > > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. >> > > > > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > Timo >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: >> > > > > > > Hi Team, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from >> 1.17 >> > > to >> > > > > > 1.18, >> > > > > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph >> > > created a >> > > > > > jira >> > > > > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In a nutshell: >> > > > > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column >> > > > > > > - Run a select which returns this column >> > > > > > > - The return type changes: >> > > > > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 >> > > > > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will >> > > break >> > > > > some >> > > > > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding >> this >> > > > > > > independently [3]. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? >> > > > > > > - Do we want to revert the change? >> > > > > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior >> > > > > configurable? >> > > > > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > Peter >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - >> > DataType >> > > > > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] >> > > > > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - >> > > DataTypeHint >> > > > > > > don't support Row> >> > > > > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL >> > > > > primitive >> > > > > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > >> >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi all, +1 for reverting it. I'd like to volunteer as the release manager of 1.18.1 and will send the discussion email for the 1.18 release asap. Best regards, Jing On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 1:26 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > +1 for reverting it. > > Also, I’m not sure should we release 1.18.1 as soon as possible after it’s > merged. If I understand correctly, users cannot upgrade flink job from > 1.18.0 to 1.18.1 directly if we reverting it in 1.18.1, right? > > If so, it’s better to release 1.18.1 asap, and try to avoid users to use a > wrong Data type. > Looking forward to hearing from you, thank you. > > Best, > Rui > > On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 00:28, Xingcan Cui wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up, Peter. I'm +1 for reverting the change. > > > > Best, > > Xingcan > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:40 AM Martijn Visser > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Agree with what has been said already. I've marked > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket > > > for 1.18.1 > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Martijn > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi < > balassi.mar...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. > > > > > > > > Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best > if > > we > > > > could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Peter, Timo > > > > > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a > > breaking > > > > > change. > > > > > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > aitozi > > > > > > > > > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a > > > serious > > > > > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many > > > related > > > > > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > > > > > > > > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > > > > > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Timo > > > > > > > > > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from > 1.17 > > > to > > > > > > 1.18, > > > > > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph > > > created a > > > > > > jira > > > > > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a nutshell: > > > > > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > > > > > > - Run a select which returns this column > > > > > > > - The return type changes: > > > > > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > > > > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will > > > break > > > > > some > > > > > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding > this > > > > > > > independently [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > > > > > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > > > > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior > > > > > configurable? > > > > > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - > > DataType > > > > > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > > > > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - > > > DataTypeHint > > > > > > > don't support Row> > > > > > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL > > > > > primitive > > > > > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi all, +1 for reverting it. Also, I’m not sure should we release 1.18.1 as soon as possible after it’s merged. If I understand correctly, users cannot upgrade flink job from 1.18.0 to 1.18.1 directly if we reverting it in 1.18.1, right? If so, it’s better to release 1.18.1 asap, and try to avoid users to use a wrong Data type. Looking forward to hearing from you, thank you. Best, Rui On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 00:28, Xingcan Cui wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for bringing this up, Peter. I'm +1 for reverting the change. > > Best, > Xingcan > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:40 AM Martijn Visser > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Agree with what has been said already. I've marked > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket > > for 1.18.1 > > > > Best regards, > > > > Martijn > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi > > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. > > > > > > Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best if > we > > > could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Peter, Timo > > > > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a > breaking > > > > change. > > > > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > aitozi > > > > > > > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > > > > > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a > > serious > > > > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many > > related > > > > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > > > > > > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > > > > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Timo > > > > > > > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > > > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 > > to > > > > > 1.18, > > > > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph > > created a > > > > > jira > > > > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > > > > > > > > > In a nutshell: > > > > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > > > > > - Run a select which returns this column > > > > > > - The return type changes: > > > > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > > > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > > > > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > > > > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will > > break > > > > some > > > > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this > > > > > > independently [3]. > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > > > > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > > > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior > > > > configurable? > > > > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - > DataType > > > > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > > > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - > > DataTypeHint > > > > > > don't support Row> > > > > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL > > > > primitive > > > > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi, Thanks for bringing this up, Peter. I'm +1 for reverting the change. Best, Xingcan On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:40 AM Martijn Visser wrote: > Hi all, > > Agree with what has been said already. I've marked > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket > for 1.18.1 > > Best regards, > > Martijn > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi > wrote: > > > > Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. > > > > Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best if we > > could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: > > > > > Hi Peter, Timo > > > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a breaking > > > change. > > > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 > > > > > > Regards, > > > aitozi > > > > > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > > > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a > serious > > > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many > related > > > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > > > > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > > > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Timo > > > > > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 > to > > > > 1.18, > > > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph > created a > > > > jira > > > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > > > > > > > In a nutshell: > > > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > > > > - Run a select which returns this column > > > > > - The return type changes: > > > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will > break > > > some > > > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this > > > > > independently [3]. > > > > > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > > > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior > > > configurable? > > > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType > > > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - > DataTypeHint > > > > > don't support Row> > > > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL > > > primitive > > > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi all, Agree with what has been said already. I've marked https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 as a blocker ticket for 1.18.1 Best regards, Martijn On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 4:25 PM Márton Balassi wrote: > > Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. > > Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best if we > could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: > > > Hi Peter, Timo > > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a breaking > > change. > > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 > > > > Regards, > > aitozi > > > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a serious > > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many related > > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Timo > > > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 to > > > 1.18, > > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph created a > > > jira > > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > > > > > In a nutshell: > > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > > > - Run a select which returns this column > > > > - The return type changes: > > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will break > > some > > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this > > > > independently [3]. > > > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior > > configurable? > > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Peter > > > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType > > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - DataTypeHint > > > > don't support Row> > > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL > > primitive > > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Thanks, for raising this Peter. +1 for reverting the change. Given the response from Timo and Aitozi, I believe it would be best if we could ship reverting the change in 1.18.1. On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:47 PM Aitozi wrote: > Hi Peter, Timo > Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a breaking > change. > I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 > > Regards, > aitozi > > Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > > > Hi Peter, > > > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a serious > > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many related > > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > > > Regards, > > Timo > > > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > > Hi Team, > > > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 to > > 1.18, > > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph created a > > jira > > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > > > In a nutshell: > > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > > - Run a select which returns this column > > > - The return type changes: > > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will break > some > > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this > > > independently [3]. > > > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior > configurable? > > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Peter > > > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType > > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - DataTypeHint > > > don't support Row> > > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL > primitive > > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > > > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi Peter, Timo Sorry for this breaking change, I didn't notice that was a breaking change. I'm +1 to revert the FLINK-33523 Regards, aitozi Timo Walther 于2023年12月7日周四 20:41写道： > Hi Peter, > > thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a serious > issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many related > utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: > > - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. > - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. > > Regards, > Timo > > On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: > > Hi Team, > > > > We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 to > 1.18, > > and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph created a > jira > > [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. > > > > In a nutshell: > > - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column > > - Run a select which returns this column > > - The return type changes: > > - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 > > - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 > > > > The change is introduced by this jira [2]. > > > > While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will break some > > users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this > > independently [3]. > > > > What is the opinion of the community about this change? > > - Do we want to revert the change? > > - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior configurable? > > - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? > > > > Thanks, > > Peter > > > > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType > > ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] > > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - DataTypeHint > > don't support Row> > > [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL primitive > > array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0 > > > >
Re: SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi Peter, thanks for reaching out to the Flink community. This is indeed a serious issue. As the author of the Flink type system, DataType and many related utilities I strongly vote for reverting FLINK-33523: - It changes the Flink type system without a FLIP. - It breaks backwards compatibility with UDFs and connectors. Regards, Timo On 07.12.23 07:38, Péter Váry wrote: Hi Team, We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 to 1.18, and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph created a jira [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. In a nutshell: - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column - Run a select which returns this column - The return type changes: - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 The change is introduced by this jira [2]. While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will break some users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this independently [3]. What is the opinion of the community about this change? - Do we want to revert the change? - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior configurable? - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? Thanks, Peter [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - DataTypeHint don't support Row> [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL primitive array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0
SQL return type change from 1.17 to 1.18
Hi Team, We are working on upgrading the Iceberg-Flink connector from 1.17 to 1.18, and found that some of our tests are failing. Prabhu Joseph created a jira [1] to discuss this issue, along with short example code. In a nutshell: - Create a table with an 'ARRAY' column - Run a select which returns this column - The return type changes: - From 'Object[]' - in 1.17 - To 'int[]' - in 1.18 The change is introduced by this jira [2]. While I understand the reasoning behind this change, this will break some users existing workflow as evidenced by Xingcan Cui finding this independently [3]. What is the opinion of the community about this change? - Do we want to revert the change? - Do we ask the owners of the change to make this behavior configurable? - Do we accept this behavior change in a minor release? Thanks, Peter [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33523 - DataType ARRAY fails to cast into Object[] [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-31835 - DataTypeHint don't support Row> [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33547 - SQL primitive array type after upgrading to Flink 1.18.0
