Github user HeartSaVioR commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2768
I don't see any use case on using transactional API (even when I start
contribution on Apache Storm) so completely OK to remove, but feel safer to ask
@revans2 to verify Bobby hasn't have use
I'd like to say first, thanks Stig to take up remaining issues. Thanks to
his efforts, according to the epic, we have only one major issue left:
porting UI to Java [1], and pull request [2] is available for that.
There're another issues [3] [4] targeting 2.0.0 (since it is backward
incompatible)
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2767
---
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2766
---
Github user HeartSaVioR commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2766#discussion_r20357
--- Diff: docs/storm-sql-internal.md ---
@@ -18,18 +18,16 @@ Figure 1 describes the workflow of executing a SQL
query in StormSQL. First, use
Github user HeartSaVioR commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2766#discussion_r203588814
--- Diff: docs/storm-sql-example.md ---
@@ -291,9 +291,4 @@ That's it! Supposing we have UDF which queries geo
location via remote ip, we ca
Github user agresch commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2618
Couple of comments back to @revans2 from Apr5.
1) We don't delete the blobs on the nimbus side for a while after we kill
the topology. - Would we also prevent the user from doing so
Github user agresch commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2618
Just curious what the plan is fo this PR?
---
GitHub user srdo opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2768
STORM-3156: Remove the transactional topology API
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3156
I'm not very familiar with the transactional topology API, so please let me
know if I missed
Github user srdo commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2767
Going to trigger another build, the previous one failed on the Java 10 runs
due to a transient issue with Travis.
---
Github user srdo commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2767
@danny0405 If you ignore the first commit and only look at changes from
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2767/commits/29d98ccd1c775c58448dac2ed0010718113bfab8
it should be easier to manage. It's
Github user danny0405 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2767
@srdo Wow, the change is huge, i would take some time to review this patch.
---
12 matches
Mail list logo
