> Shaoxuan
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Fabian Hueske <
> fhue...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Hi Radu,
> > > >>>>&
gt; > >>>>> - streaming SQL OVER RANGE for processing time
> > >>>>> - bounded PRECEDING
> > >>>>> - unbounded PRECEDING
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - streaming SQL OVER RANGE for event time
t
section for this issue.
-Original Message-
From: Fabian Hueske [mailto:fhue...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 3:14 PM
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows for
streaming tables
Hi everybody,
I created the follo
> >>>>> We need a good design document to figure out what is the best
> >>>>> approach. A ProcessFunction with a sorted state might be a good
> >>> solution
> >>>> as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best, Fab
7, right? "
>>>>>> Why would you need this operator? The window buffer can act to some
>>>>> extent
>>>>>> as a priority queue as long as the trigger and evictor is set to
>>>>>> work
>>>>> based
>>>>
ular
> > > > > type of window (session/sliding/sliderows/processing time/...)
> will
> > > > > have a clear implementation and a corresponding architecture within
> > > the jira issue?
> > > > What
> > > > > do you think about s
ation rule class and with this each particular
>>>>> type of window (session/sliding/sliderows/processing time/...) will
>>>>> have a clear implementation and a corresponding architecture within
>>> the jira issue?
>>>> What
>>>>> do
you think?
-Original Message-
From: Fabian Hueske [mailto:fhue...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 10:55 AM
To: dev@flink.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows for
streaming tables
Hi everybody,
thanks for the great discussions so
on,
> > > > or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is
> > > > prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the
> > sender
> > > > by phone or email immediately and delete it!
> > > >
> > > >
> &g
Hi,Fabian
Thank you for your reply. Yes, regarding the point you have mentioned “to
improve the efficiency of the implementation”, I agree with you. I did not
clearly explain my solution in my last email. I intended to say the
existing window mechanism can be used for bounded preceding, but will n
overlapping contributions.
> > >
> > > All of these make sense to me. But I have some questions.
> > >
> > > Q1: If I understand correctly, we will not support TumbleRows and
> > > SessionRows at the beginning. But maybe support them as a syntax sugar
ührer: Bo PENG, Wanzhou MENG, Lifang CHEN
> > This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from
> > HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is
> > listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way
> > (includ
; 发件人: Shaoxuan Wang [mailto:wshaox...@gmail.com]
> 发送时间: 2017年1月25日 13:43
> 收件人: dev@flink.apache.org
> 主题: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows for
> streaming tables
>
> Hi everyone,
> Thanks for this great discussion, and glad to see more and more
> HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is
> > listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way
> > (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure,
> reproduction,
> > or dissemination) by persons other than
on contained herein in any way
> > (including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure,
> reproduction,
> > or dissemination) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is
> > prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
> > by phon
> similar to the design we discussed in FLINK-4697, right?
>
> +1 not support for OVER ROW for event time at this point.
>
> Regards, Jark
>
>
> > 在 2017年1月24日，上午10:28，Hongyuhong 写道：
> >
> > Hi,
> > We are also interested in streaming sql and very willing to
event time at this point.
>
> Regards, Jark
>
>
> > 在 2017年1月24日，上午10:28，Hongyuhong 写道：
> >
> > Hi,
> > We are also interested in streaming sql and very willing to participate
> and contribute.
> >
> > We are now in progress and we will also contribute to calcit
Hi SunJincheng,
thanks a lot for your comments!
regarding the suitability of DataStream sliding windows: You are right that
UNBOUNDED PRECEDING windows cannot be implemented as DataStream sliding
windows. The same is true for OVER RANGE windows.
I think the only OVER windows that could be done wi
sql and very willing to participate
> and contribute.
> >
> > We are now in progress and we will also contribute to calcite to push
> forward the window and stream-join support.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------
> > Sender: Fabian Hueske [mailt
contribute to calcite to push forward
> the window and stream-join support.
>
>
>
> --
> Sender: Fabian Hueske [mailto:fhue...@gmail.com] Send Time: 2017年1月24日
> 5:55
> Receiver: dev@flink.apache.org
> Theme: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows
> for stream
Hello Fabian,
Your plan looks good, I totally agree with your points.
While I am working on FLINK-4680, I had the similar concerns about the
semantics of TumbleRows and SessionRows. It is much clear if we define
these windows as SlideRows with PARTITION BY clause.
Regarding to the implementation pl
gt;
> --
> Sender: Fabian Hueske [mailto:fhue...@gmail.com]
> Send Time: 2017年1月24日 5:55
> Receiver: dev@flink.apache.org
> Theme: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows for
> streaming tables
>
> Hi Haohui,
>
> our plan was in fact to p
5:55
Receiver: dev@flink.apache.org
Theme: Re: [DISCUSS] Development of SQL OVER / Table API Row Windows for
streaming tables
Hi Haohui,
our plan was in fact to piggy-back on Calcite and use the TUMBLE function [1]
once is it is available (CALCITE-1345 [2]).
Unfortunately, this issue does not
Hi Haohui,
our plan was in fact to piggy-back on Calcite and use the TUMBLE function
[1] once is it is available (CALCITE-1345 [2]).
Unfortunately, this issue does not seem to be very active, so I don't know
what the progress is.
I would suggest to move the discussion about group windows to a sep
Hi Fabian,
FLINK-4692 has added the support for tumbling window and we are excited to
try it out and expose it as a SQL construct.
Just curious -- what's your thought on the SQL syntax on tumbling window?
Implementation wise it might make sense to think tumbling window as a
special case of the s
+1
We are also quite interested in these features and would love to
participate and contribute.
~Haohui
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:31 AM Fabian Hueske wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> it seems that currently several contributors are working on new features
> for the streaming Table API / SQL around r
26 matches
Mail list logo
