Re: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
t;>>> > >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when > it's > > >> out > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> Kind regards > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> Fil > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < > > >> > >>>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Hi All > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for > the > > >> same > > >> > >>>> key > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async > > >> operations. > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the > > >> offending > > >> > >>>> and all > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the > state and > > >> > not > > >> > >>>> > process any > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds > or a > > >> > >>>> human > > >> > >>>> > sends a > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > > > >> > >>>> > > >> > > > >> > https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mermaid.live/edit*pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek__;Iw!!PIHXbWFC2YI!FKRzZxYSB6UVZlTy4uqb3NKNf8DGzFnkm2qkufOk7fZfDmS0Q4NZ-7RKKsN7v2chauv1P3wHG0ifvBJbxKNLXPbK8amv$> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the > future): > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> graph LR > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun > job) > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote > function) > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| > > >> remote > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| > > >> > other(other > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> systems) > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is > > >> nice-to-have > > >> > >>>> from > > >> > >>>> > an > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not > strictly > > >> > >>>> required. > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >> > >&
RE: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
t;>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps > >> ++Till > >> > >>>> would > >> > >>>> > >>>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's > >> > >>>> helped me > >> > >>>> > out > >> > >>>> > >>>>> with statefun work before > >> > >>>> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's > >> out > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> Kind regards > >> > >>>> > >>>>> Fil > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < > >> > >>>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> > >> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >> > >>>> > >>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Hi All > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the > >> same > >> > >>>> key > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async > >> operations. > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the > >> offending > >> > >>>> and all > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and > >> > not > >> > >>>> > process any > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a > >> > >>>> human > >> > >>>> > sends a > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > >> > > >> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> graph LR > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| > >> remote > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| > >> > other(other > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> systems) > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is > >> nice-to-have > >> > >>>> from > >> > >>>> > an > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly > >> > >>>> required. > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no > >> way I > >> >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
gt; > >>>>> Fil >> > >>>> > >>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < >> > >>>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> >> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: >> > >>>> > >>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Hi All >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the >> same >> > >>>> key >> > >>>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async >> operations. >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the >> offending >> > >>>> and all >> > >>>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and >> > not >> > >>>> > process any >> > >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a >> > >>>> human >> > >>>> > sends a >> > >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> >> > >> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >> > >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >> > >>>> > >>>>>> graph LR >> > >>>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >> > >>>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >> > >>>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| >> remote >> > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| >> > other(other >> > >>>> > >>>>>> systems) >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is >> nice-to-have >> > >>>> from >> > >>>> > an >> > >>>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly >> > >>>> required. >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no >> way I >> > >>>> can >> > >>>> > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async >> > i/o >> > >>>> > (which when >> > >>>> > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to >> keyed >> > >>>> state) >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that >> > has >> > >>>> > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a >> description >> > >>>> or a >> > >>>> > jira: >> > >>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren < >> > >>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com >> > >>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, >> > including >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> messaging >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> among functions. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and >> have >> > >>>> also >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> enabled >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be >> able >> > >>>> to >> > >>>> > help >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> out >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> here. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Galen >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Hi Gordon, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling >> > >>>> remote >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Python-based functions. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen >> > >>>> with the >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> this >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > subproject in the future. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > — Ken >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Begin forwarded message: >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and >> > >>>> onwards >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Hi Filip, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously >> > >>>> active on >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> the >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently >> > have >> > >>>> other >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> focuses. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on >> how >> > >>>> to >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> proceed if >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported >> Flink >> > >>>> version, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> I'm still >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be >> able >> > to >> > >>>> > drive >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> this (or >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see >> > how >> > >>>> many >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> users are >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're >> using >> > >>>> it? >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / >> > >>>> > bi-directional >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > messaging between individual functions? >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow >> your >> > >>>> stateful >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> functions >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > to run remotely as separate processes? >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > If the majority is only the latter category, there >> might >> > >>>> be a >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> case to >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has >> > >>>> been a >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> discussion >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > in >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > the past). >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Thanks, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Gordon >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki < >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > wrote: >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful >> > functions >> > >>>> has >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> come to a >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > bit >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to >> > use >> > >>>> Flink >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> 1.15 >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > being >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> The background to this question is that my team is >> on a >> > >>>> shared >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Flink >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. >> If >> > I >> > >>>> need >> > >>>> > to >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > re-write >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a >> > remote >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> stateful >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > function) >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> then I need to get started right away. >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Many thanks, >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Fil >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > -- >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Ken Krugler >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > http://www.scaleunlimited.com >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Custom big data solutions >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>> > >>>>>> >> > >>>> > >> > >>>> >> > >>> >> > >> >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
gt; > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and > > not > > >>>> > process any > > >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a > > >>>> human > > >>>> > sends a > > >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > > >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): > > >>>> > >>>>>> graph LR > > >>>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) > > >>>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job > > >>>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) > > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| > remote > > >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| > > other(other > > >>>> > >>>>>> systems) > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is > nice-to-have > > >>>> from > > >>>> > an > > >>>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly > > >>>> required. > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way > I > > >>>> can > > >>>> > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async > > i/o > > >>>> > (which when > > >>>> > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed > > >>>> state) > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that > > has > > >>>> > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a > description > > >>>> or a > > >>>> > jira: > > >>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren < > > >>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, > > including > > >>>> > >>>>>>> messaging > > >>>> > >>>>>>> among functions. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and > have > > >>>> also > > >>>> > >>>>>>> enabled > > >>>> > >>>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be > able > > >>>> to > > >>>> > help > > >>>> > >>>>>>> out > > >>>> > >>>>>>> here. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> Galen > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < > > >>>> > >>>>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Hi Gordon, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling > > >>>> remote > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Python-based functions. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen > > >>>> with the > > >>>> > >>>>>>> this > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > subproject in the future. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > — Ken > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Begin forwarded message: > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and > > >>>> onwards > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Hi Filip, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously > > >>>> active on > > >>>> > >>>>>>> the > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently > > have > > >>>> other > > >>>> > >>>>>>> focuses. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on > how > > >>>> to > > >>>> > >>>>>>> proceed if > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink > > >>>> version, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> I'm still > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be > able > > to > > >>>> > drive > > >>>> > >>>>>>> this (or > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see > > how > > >>>> many > > >>>> > >>>>>>> users are > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're > using > > >>>> it? > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / > > >>>> > bi-directional > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > messaging between individual functions? > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your > > >>>> stateful > > >>>> > >>>>>>> functions > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > to run remotely as separate processes? > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > If the majority is only the latter category, there > might > > >>>> be a > > >>>> > >>>>>>> case to > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has > > >>>> been a > > >>>> > >>>>>>> discussion > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > in > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > the past). > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Thanks, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > Gordon > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki < > > >>>> > >>>>>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > wrote: > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful > > functions > > >>>> has > > >>>> > >>>>>>> come to a > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > bit > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to > > use > > >>>> Flink > > >>>> > >>>>>>> 1.15 > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > being > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> The background to this question is that my team is > on a > > >>>> shared > > >>>> > >>>>>>> Flink > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. > If > > I > > >>>> need > > >>>> > to > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > re-write > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a > > remote > > >>>> > >>>>>>> stateful > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > function) > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> then I need to get started right away. > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Many thanks, > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> Fil > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > -- > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Ken Krugler > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > http://www.scaleunlimited.com > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Custom big data solutions > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > > >>>> > >>>>>>> > > >>>> > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > >>> > > >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
t;>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com> > >>>> > > wrote: > >>>> > > > >>>> > >> Sure thing. One question -- Flink 1.16 was just released a few > >>>> days ago. > >>>> > >> Should I support 1.15, or just go straight to 1.16? > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 8:49 AM Till Rohrmann < > >>>> trohrm...@apache.org> > >>>> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >>> Hi folks, > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>> if you can open a PR for supporting Flink 1.15 Galen, then this > >>>> would > >>>> > be > >>>> > >>> awesome. I've assigned you to this ticket. The next thing after > >>>> merging > >>>> > >>> this PR would be creating a new StateFun release. Once we have > >>>> merged > >>>> > the > >>>> > >>> PR, let's check who can help with it the fastest. > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>> Cheers, > >>>> > >>> Till > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 1:10 PM Galen Warren < > >>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com> > >>>> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Yes, I could do that. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki < > >>>> > >>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Hi All > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> So what's the play here? > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till > >>>> would > >>>> > >>>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's > >>>> helped me > >>>> > out > >>>> > >>>>> with statefun work before > >>>> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Kind regards > >>>> > >>>>> Fil > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < > >>>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> > >>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> Hi All > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same > >>>> key > >>>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending > >>>> and all > >>>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and > not > >>>> > process any > >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a > >>>> human > >>>> > sends a > >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>> > https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): > >>>> > &
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
>>>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com> >>>> > >>> wrote: >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>>> Yes, I could do that. >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki < >>>> > >>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>>> Hi All >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> So what's the play here? >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till >>>> would >>>> > >>>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's >>>> helped me >>>> > out >>>> > >>>>> with statefun work before >>>> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> Kind regards >>>> > >>>>> Fil >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < >>>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> >>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Hi All >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same >>>> key >>>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending >>>> and all >>>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not >>>> > process any >>>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a >>>> human >>>> > sends a >>>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> diagram: >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>>> > >>>>>> graph LR >>>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other >>>> > >>>>>> systems) >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have >>>> from >>>> > an >>>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly >>>> required. >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I >>>> can >>>> > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o >>>> > (which when >>>> > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed >>>> state) >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >>>> > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a descript
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
gt; > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till >>> would >>> > >>>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped >>> me >>> > out >>> > >>>>> with statefun work before >>> > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> Kind regards >>> > >>>>> Fil >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < >>> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> >>> > >>>>> wrote: >>> > >>>>> >>> > >>>>>> Hi All >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same >>> key >>> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and >>> all >>> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not >>> > process any >>> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human >>> > sends a >>> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> diagram: >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>> > >>>>>> graph LR >>> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other >>> > >>>>>> systems) >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have >>> from >>> > an >>> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly >>> required. >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can >>> > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o >>> > (which when >>> > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed >>> state) >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >>> > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description >>> or a >>> > jira: >>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren < >>> ga...@cvillewarrens.com >>> > > >>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>> > >>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >>> > >>>>>>> >>> > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including >>> > >>>>>>> messaging >>> > >>>>>>> among functions. >>> > >>>>>>> >>> > >>&g
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
t;>> Fil >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki < >> > filip.karni...@gmail.com> >> > >>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>> >> > >>>>>> Hi All >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >> > >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and >> all >> > >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not >> > process any >> > >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human >> > sends a >> > >>>>>> 'skip' command message. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> diagram: >> > >>>>>> >> > >> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >> > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >> > >>>>>> graph LR >> > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >> > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >> > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >> > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >> > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other >> > >>>>>> systems) >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have >> from >> > an >> > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly >> required. >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can >> > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o >> > (which when >> > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed >> state) >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >> > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or >> a >> > jira: >> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren < >> ga...@cvillewarrens.com >> > > >> > >>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including >> > >>>>>>> messaging >> > >>>>>>> among functions. >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have >> also >> > >>>>>>> enabled >> > >>>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to >> > help >> > >>>>>>> out >> > >>>>>>> here. >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Thanks, >> > >>>>>>> Galen >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < >> > >>>>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> >> > >>>>>>> wrote: >> > >>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> > Hi Gordon, >> > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remo
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
d3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > > >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): > > >>>>>> graph LR > > >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) > > >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job > > >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) > > >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote > > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other > > >>>>>> systems) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from > > an > > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly > required. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can > > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o > > (which when > > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has > > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a > > jira: > > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren < > ga...@cvillewarrens.com > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including > > >>>>>>> messaging > > >>>>>>> among functions. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also > > >>>>>>> enabled > > >>>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to > > help > > >>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>> here. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>>> Galen > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < > > >>>>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > Hi Gordon, > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote > > >>>>>>> > Python-based functions. > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with > the > > >>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>> > subproject in the future. > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > — Ken > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > Begin forwarded message: > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > > >>>>>>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards > > >>>>>>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > > >>>>>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > > >>>>>>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > Hi Filip, > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active > on > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have > other > > >>>>>>> focuses. > > >>>>>>> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to > > >>>>>>> proceed if > > >>>>>>> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink > version, > > >>>>>>> I'm still > > >>>>>>> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to > > drive > > >>>>>>> this (or > > >>>>>>> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how > many > > >>>>>>> users are > > >>>>>>> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / > > bi-directional > > >>>>>>> > > messaging between individual functions? > > >>>>>>> > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your > stateful > > >>>>>>> functions > > >>>>>>> > > to run remotely as separate processes? > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a > > >>>>>>> case to > > >>>>>>> > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a > > >>>>>>> discussion > > >>>>>>> > in > > >>>>>>> > > the past). > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > Thanks, > > >>>>>>> > > Gordon > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki < > > >>>>>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has > > >>>>>>> come to a > > >>>>>>> > bit > > >>>>>>> > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use > Flink > > >>>>>>> 1.15 > > >>>>>>> > being > > >>>>>>> > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> The background to this question is that my team is on a > shared > > >>>>>>> Flink > > >>>>>>> > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I > need > > to > > >>>>>>> > re-write > > >>>>>>> > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote > > >>>>>>> stateful > > >>>>>>> > function) > > >>>>>>> > >> then I need to get started right away. > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > >> Many thanks, > > >>>>>>> > >> Fil > > >>>>>>> > >> > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > -- > > >>>>>>> > Ken Krugler > > >>>>>>> > http://www.scaleunlimited.com > > >>>>>>> > Custom big data solutions > > >>>>>>> > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
; |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote > >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other > >>>>>> systems) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from > an > >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can > >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o > (which when > >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has > >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a > jira: > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren > > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including > >>>>>>> messaging > >>>>>>> among functions. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also > >>>>>>> enabled > >>>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to > help > >>>>>>> out > >>>>>>> here. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> Galen > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < > >>>>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Hi Gordon, > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote > >>>>>>> > Python-based functions. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the > >>>>>>> this > >>>>>>> > subproject in the future. > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > — Ken > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > Begin forwarded message: > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > >>>>>>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards > >>>>>>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > >>>>>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > >>>>>>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > Hi Filip, > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other > >>>>>>> focuses. > >>>>>>> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to > >>>>>>> proceed if > >>>>>>> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, > >>>>>>> I'm still > >>>>>>> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to > drive > >>>>>>> this (or > >>>>>>> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many > >>>>>>> users are > >>>>>>> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / > bi-directional > >>>>>>> > > messaging between individual functions? > >>>>>>> > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful > >>>>>>> functions > >>>>>>> > > to run remotely as separate processes? > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a > >>>>>>> case to > >>>>>>> > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a > >>>>>>> discussion > >>>>>>> > in > >>>>>>> > > the past). > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > Thanks, > >>>>>>> > > Gordon > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki < > >>>>>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > > wrote: > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has > >>>>>>> come to a > >>>>>>> > bit > >>>>>>> > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink > >>>>>>> 1.15 > >>>>>>> > being > >>>>>>> > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>>>>> > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>>>>> > >> The background to this question is that my team is on a shared > >>>>>>> Flink > >>>>>>> > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need > to > >>>>>>> > re-write > >>>>>>> > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote > >>>>>>> stateful > >>>>>>> > function) > >>>>>>> > >> then I need to get started right away. > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>>>>> > >> Many thanks, > >>>>>>> > >> Fil > >>>>>>> > >> > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > -- > >>>>>>> > Ken Krugler > >>>>>>> > http://www.scaleunlimited.com > >>>>>>> > Custom big data solutions > >>>>>>> > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Yes, that makes sense. PR is here: [FLINK-29814][statefun] Change supported Flink version to 1.15.2 by galenwarren · Pull Request #319 · apache/flink-statefun (github.com) <https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/319>. On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 11:35 AM Till Rohrmann wrote: > I think there might still be value in supporting 1.15 since not everyone > upgrades Flink very fast. Hopefully, for Statefun the diff between Flink > 1.15 and 1.16 boils down to changing the Flink dependencies. > > Cheers, > Till > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 2:06 PM Galen Warren > wrote: > >> Sure thing. One question -- Flink 1.16 was just released a few days ago. >> Should I support 1.15, or just go straight to 1.16? >> >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 8:49 AM Till Rohrmann >> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> if you can open a PR for supporting Flink 1.15 Galen, then this would be >>> awesome. I've assigned you to this ticket. The next thing after merging >>> this PR would be creating a new StateFun release. Once we have merged the >>> PR, let's check who can help with it the fastest. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Till >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 1:10 PM Galen Warren >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, I could do that. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki < >>>> filip.karni...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All >>>>> >>>>> So what's the play here? >>>>> >>>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would >>>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out >>>>> with statefun work before >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >>>>> >>>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kind regards >>>>> Fil >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi All >>>>>> >>>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >>>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>>>>> >>>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all >>>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process >>>>>> any >>>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a >>>>>> 'skip' command message. >>>>>> >>>>>> diagram: >>>>>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>>>>> graph LR >>>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other >>>>>> systems) >>>>>> >>>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an >>>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. >>>>>> >>>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can >>>>>> think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which >>>>>> when >>>>>> I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >>>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren >>>>>> wrote: >&g
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
I think there might still be value in supporting 1.15 since not everyone upgrades Flink very fast. Hopefully, for Statefun the diff between Flink 1.15 and 1.16 boils down to changing the Flink dependencies. Cheers, Till On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 2:06 PM Galen Warren wrote: > Sure thing. One question -- Flink 1.16 was just released a few days ago. > Should I support 1.15, or just go straight to 1.16? > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 8:49 AM Till Rohrmann > wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> if you can open a PR for supporting Flink 1.15 Galen, then this would be >> awesome. I've assigned you to this ticket. The next thing after merging >> this PR would be creating a new StateFun release. Once we have merged the >> PR, let's check who can help with it the fastest. >> >> Cheers, >> Till >> >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 1:10 PM Galen Warren >> wrote: >> >>> Yes, I could do that. >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All >>>> >>>> So what's the play here? >>>> >>>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would >>>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out >>>> with statefun work before >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >>>> >>>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >>>> >>>> >>>> Kind regards >>>> Fil >>>> >>>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All >>>>> >>>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >>>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>>>> >>>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all >>>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any >>>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a >>>>> 'skip' command message. >>>>> >>>>> diagram: >>>>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>>>> graph LR >>>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other >>>>> systems) >>>>> >>>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an >>>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. >>>>> >>>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think >>>>> of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I >>>>> last >>>>> checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >>>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: >>>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including >>>>>> messaging >>>>>> among functions. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also >>>>>> enabled >>>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help >>>>>> out >>>>>> here. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Galen >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Sure thing. One question -- Flink 1.16 was just released a few days ago. Should I support 1.15, or just go straight to 1.16? On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 8:49 AM Till Rohrmann wrote: > Hi folks, > > if you can open a PR for supporting Flink 1.15 Galen, then this would be > awesome. I've assigned you to this ticket. The next thing after merging > this PR would be creating a new StateFun release. Once we have merged the > PR, let's check who can help with it the fastest. > > Cheers, > Till > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 1:10 PM Galen Warren > wrote: > >> Yes, I could do that. >> >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All >>> >>> So what's the play here? >>> >>> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would >>> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out >>> with statefun work before >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >>> >>> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >>> >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Fil >>> >>> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All >>>> >>>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >>>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>>> >>>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all >>>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any >>>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a >>>> 'skip' command message. >>>> >>>> diagram: >>>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>>> graph LR >>>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other systems) >>>> >>>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an >>>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. >>>> >>>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think >>>> of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I last >>>> checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) >>>> >>>> >>>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has >>>> something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: >>>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >>>>> >>>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging >>>>> among functions. >>>>> >>>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also >>>>> enabled >>>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help >>>>> out >>>>> here. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Galen >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < >>>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > Hi Gordon, >>>>> > >>>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote >>>>> > Python-based functions. >>>>> > >>>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this >>>>> > subproject in the future. >>>>> > >>>>> > — Ken >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > > Begin forwarded message: >>>>>
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi folks, if you can open a PR for supporting Flink 1.15 Galen, then this would be awesome. I've assigned you to this ticket. The next thing after merging this PR would be creating a new StateFun release. Once we have merged the PR, let's check who can help with it the fastest. Cheers, Till On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 1:10 PM Galen Warren wrote: > Yes, I could do that. > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki > wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> So what's the play here? >> >> Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would >> assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out >> with statefun work before >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 >> >> I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out >> >> >> Kind regards >> Fil >> >> On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All >>> >>> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >>> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >>> >>> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all >>> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any >>> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a >>> 'skip' command message. >>> >>> diagram: >>> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >>> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >>> graph LR >>> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >>> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >>> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >>> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >>> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other systems) >>> >>> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an >>> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. >>> >>> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think >>> of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I last >>> checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) >>> >>> >>> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has something >>> to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: >>> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Gordon (and others), >>>> >>>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging >>>> among functions. >>>> >>>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also >>>> enabled >>>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help out >>>> here. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Galen >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler < >>>> kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > Hi Gordon, >>>> > >>>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote >>>> > Python-based functions. >>>> > >>>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this >>>> > subproject in the future. >>>> > >>>> > — Ken >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > > Begin forwarded message: >>>> > > >>>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" >>>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards >>>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT >>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org >>>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org >>>> > > >>>> > > Hi Filip, >>>> > > >>>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. >>>> > > >>>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the >>>> > > S
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Yes, I could do that. On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:48 AM Filip Karnicki wrote: > Hi All > > So what's the play here? > > Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would assign > this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out > with statefun work before > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 > > I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out > > > Kind regards > Fil > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki > wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key >> sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. >> >> If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all >> subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any >> further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a >> 'skip' command message. >> >> diagram: >> https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek >> mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): >> graph LR >> incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) >> commands[commands] -->|skip| job >> job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) >> remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote >> remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other systems) >> >> Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an >> independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. >> >> So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think of >> to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I last >> checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) >> >> >> P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has something >> to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: >> https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 >> >> >> On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Gordon (and others), >>> >>> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging >>> among functions. >>> >>> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also enabled >>> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help out >>> here. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Galen >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler >> > >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Hi Gordon, >>> > >>> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote >>> > Python-based functions. >>> > >>> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this >>> > subproject in the future. >>> > >>> > — Ken >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > Begin forwarded message: >>> > > >>> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" >>> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards >>> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT >>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org >>> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org >>> > > >>> > > Hi Filip, >>> > > >>> > > Thanks for bringing this up. >>> > > >>> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the >>> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other >>> focuses. >>> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed >>> if >>> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. >>> > > >>> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm >>> still >>> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive >>> this (or >>> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). >>> > > >>> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users >>> are >>> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi All So what's the play here? Galen, what do you think about taking this on? Perhaps ++Till would assign this jira to you (with your permission) given he's helped me out with statefun work before https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-29814 I can try to move to move statefun to flink 1.16 when it's out Kind regards Fil On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 at 10:02, Filip Karnicki wrote: > Hi All > > Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key > sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. > > If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all > subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any > further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a > 'skip' command message. > > diagram: > https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek > mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): > graph LR > incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) > commands[commands] -->|skip| job > job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) > remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote > remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other systems) > > Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an > independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. > > So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think of > to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I last > checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) > > > P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has something > to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: > https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 > > > On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren > wrote: > >> Hi Gordon (and others), >> >> I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging >> among functions. >> >> I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also enabled >> Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help out >> here. >> >> Thanks, >> Galen >> >> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Gordon, >> > >> > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote >> > Python-based functions. >> > >> > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this >> > subproject in the future. >> > >> > — Ken >> > >> > >> > >> > > Begin forwarded message: >> > > >> > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" >> > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards >> > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT >> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org >> > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org >> > > >> > > Hi Filip, >> > > >> > > Thanks for bringing this up. >> > > >> > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the >> > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other >> focuses. >> > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed if >> > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. >> > > >> > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm >> still >> > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive this >> (or >> > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). >> > > >> > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users >> are >> > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? >> > > >> > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / bi-directional >> > > messaging between individual functions? >> > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful >> functions >> > > to run remotely as separate processes? >> > > >> > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a case to >> > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a >> discussion >> > in &g
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi All Our use case is that we need to process elements for the same key sequentially, and this processing involves async operations. If any part of the processing fails, we store the offending and all subsequent incoming messages for that key in the state and not process any further messages for that key, until a retry succeeds or a human sends a 'skip' command message. diagram: https://mermaid.live/edit#pako:eNplkL1uwzAMhF-F0JQADrp76FR06tSOcQfWom3V-nFFqoUR591L20mXaqAOxHd3AC-mTZZMbfqM0wAvr00EfS62KbjYn-8C6Jui8DucTo_wmT4Oz97FEVhQqCtxXR13q_IBo-XzXWyehUc3LSu2Uyq2qIXpq2iyQ-9nmCjDSPMCmUISOuwfaEErLsVbw2272VOEDp0vmSqw5HEmC4GYsSeQpKjkv7j_buQ5tjAV4YeehOHHyQDsLAF1HbXCCyQZKB-2CTyzUOCjqUygHNBZPdxljW2MAoEaU6u0mMfGNPGqHBZJb1piasmFKlMmqxd7cqj3Dqbu0DNdfwHTGoek mermaid (in case mermaid.live goes down in the future): graph LR incoming[incoming events] --> job(Flink statefun job) commands[commands] -->|skip| job job --> |sequentially per key| remote(remote function) remote --> |on failure, delayed message to retry| remote remote --> |async puts/gets with side effects| other(other systems) Having the processing happen outside of Flink is nice-to-have from an independent scalability point of view, but is not strictly required. So long story short - no cyclic messaging, but also no way I can think of to use existing native Flink operators like async i/o (which when I last checked a few years back didn't have access to keyed state) P.S. Please note that there is already a pull request that has something to do wtih Flink 1.15, albeit without a description or a jira: https://github.com/apache/flink-statefun/pull/314 On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 19:54, Galen Warren wrote: > Hi Gordon (and others), > > I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging > among functions. > > I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also enabled > Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help out > here. > > Thanks, > Galen > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler > wrote: > > > Hi Gordon, > > > > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote > > Python-based functions. > > > > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this > > subproject in the future. > > > > — Ken > > > > > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards > > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > > > > > > Hi Filip, > > > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > > > > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the > > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other > focuses. > > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed if > > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > > > > > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm > still > > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive this > (or > > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > > > > > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users > are > > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? > > > > > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / bi-directional > > > messaging between individual functions? > > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful > functions > > > to run remotely as separate processes? > > > > > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a case to > > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a discussion > > in > > > the past). > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Gordon > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki < > filip.karni...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a > > bit > > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 > > being > > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. > > >> > > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > > >> > > >> The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink > > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to > > re-write > > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful > > function) > > >> then I need to get started right away. > > >> > > >> Many thanks, > > >> Fil > > >> > > > > -- > > Ken Krugler > > http://www.scaleunlimited.com > > Custom big data solutions > > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch > > > > > > > > >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi Gordon (and others), I'm also using this project for stateful messaging, including messaging among functions. I've contributed a small amount of code in the past and have also enabled Flink 1.15 compatibility in a local fork, so I might be able to help out here. Thanks, Galen On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 1:34 PM Ken Krugler wrote: > Hi Gordon, > > We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote > Python-based functions. > > So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this > subproject in the future. > > — Ken > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards > > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > > To: dev@flink.apache.org > > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > > > > Hi Filip, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the > > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other focuses. > > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed if > > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > > > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm still > > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive this (or > > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > > > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users are > > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? > > > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / bi-directional > > messaging between individual functions? > > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful functions > > to run remotely as separate processes? > > > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a case to > > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a discussion > in > > the past). > > > > Thanks, > > Gordon > > > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a > bit > >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 > being > >> in the `open` state since May 2022. > >> > >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > >> > >> The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink > >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to > re-write > >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful > function) > >> then I need to get started right away. > >> > >> Many thanks, > >> Fil > >> > > -- > Ken Krugler > http://www.scaleunlimited.com > Custom big data solutions > Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch > > > >
Fwd: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi Gordon, We’re using it for stateful messaging, and also calling remote Python-based functions. So yes, also very interested in what is going to happen with the this subproject in the future. — Ken > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Tzu-Li (Gordon) Tai" > Subject: Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards > Date: October 26, 2022 at 10:25:26 AM PDT > To: dev@flink.apache.org > Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org > > Hi Filip, > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the > StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other focuses. > Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed if > there seems to be no continued committer coverage. > > If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm still > familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive this (or > if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). > > For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users are > using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? > > - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / bi-directional > messaging between individual functions? > - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful functions > to run remotely as separate processes? > > If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a case to > support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a discussion in > the past). > > Thanks, > Gordon > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki > wrote: > >> Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a bit >> of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 being >> in the `open` state since May 2022. >> >> What do we think is the future of this sub-project? >> >> The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink >> cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to re-write >> all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful function) >> then I need to get started right away. >> >> Many thanks, >> Fil >> -- Ken Krugler http://www.scaleunlimited.com Custom big data solutions Flink, Pinot, Solr, Elasticsearch
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi Filip, Thanks for bringing this up. The hard truth is that committers who were previously active on the StateFun subproject, including myself, all currently have other focuses. Indeed, we may need to discuss with the community on how to proceed if there seems to be no continued committer coverage. If it's just a matter of upgrading the supported Flink version, I'm still familiar enough with the subproject to probably be able to drive this (or if your team is up to it, I can assist you on that). For the long-term, as a data point I'm curious to see how many users are using StateFun in production today, and how you're using it? - Do your applications have arbitrary / cyclic / bi-directional messaging between individual functions? - Or are you utilizing StateFun simply to allow your stateful functions to run remotely as separate processes? If the majority is only the latter category, there might be a case to support remote functions natively in Flink (which has been a discussion in the past). Thanks, Gordon On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:30 AM Filip Karnicki wrote: > Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a bit > of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 being > in the `open` state since May 2022. > > What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > > The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink > cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to re-write > all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful function) > then I need to get started right away. > > Many thanks, > Fil >
Re: Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
As far as I know the original authors are not working on this implementation anymore. Other folks might be able to provide more context. Instead of rewriting your code to be a native Flink job, would it be an option for your team to pick up the pull request to port statefun to Flink 1.15? -Max On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:31 AM Filip Karnicki wrote: > Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a bit > of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 being > in the `open` state since May 2022. > > What do we think is the future of this sub-project? > > The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink > cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to re-write > all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful function) > then I need to get started right away. > > Many thanks, > Fil >
Stateful Functions with Flink 1.15 and onwards
Hi, I noticed that the development on stateful functions has come to a bit of a halt, with a pull request to update statefun to use Flink 1.15 being in the `open` state since May 2022. What do we think is the future of this sub-project? The background to this question is that my team is on a shared Flink cluster which will soon be upgrading to Flink 1.15. If I need to re-write all our code as a native Flink job (rather than a remote stateful function) then I need to get started right away. Many thanks, Fil
