Re: Guaranteeing event order in a KeyedProcessFunction

I've realized this is not such a big issue because it's also upper bounded by the number of watermarks received, and it won't be one per event. Miguel Araújo escreveu no dia segunda, 10/05/2021 à(s) 09:39: > Thanks Dawid, having a look at CepOperator was useful. I implemented > som

Re: Guaranteeing event order in a KeyedProcessFunction

estamps larger than the Watermark > that "triggered" its generation it can become late. > > Hope those tips could help you a bit. > > Best, > > Dawid > On 04/05/2021 14:49, Miguel Araújo wrote: > > Hi Timo, > > Thanks for your answer. I think I wasn't

Re: Guaranteeing event order in a KeyedProcessFunction

n store a Map uncheckpointed by this means > that you have to ensure to initialize the map again during recovery. > > Regards, > Timo > > > [1] > > https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.12/dev/stream/state/broadcast_state.html > > On 30.04.21 11:37,

Guaranteeing event order in a KeyedProcessFunction

Hi everyone, I have a KeyedProcessFunction whose events I would like to process in event-time order. My initial idea was to use a Map keyed by timestamp and, when a new event arrives, iterate over the Map to process events older than the current watermark. The issue is that I obviously can't use

Re: Correctly serializing "Number" as state in ProcessFunction

t; no-argument constructor as well as getters and setters for the boolean flags >> } >> >> I guess a cleaner solution would be possible using a custom Kryo >> serializer as explained here: >> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.12/dev/cust

Correctly serializing "Number" as state in ProcessFunction

Hi everyone, I have a ProcessFunction which needs to store different number types for different keys, e.g., some keys need to store an integer while others need to store a double. I tried to use java.lang.Number as the type for the ValueState, but I got the expected "No fields were detected for

Re: [Statefun] Dynamic behavior

t; query the behavior for that instance on first use from a 3rd party service. > > Seth > > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:55 AM Miguel Araújo > wrote: > >> Hi Seth, >> >> Thanks for your comment. I've seen that repository in the past and it was >> really h

Re: [Statefun] Dynamic behavior

nManager function acts as an orchestrator to work with the other > functions. The repo is structured as an exercise but the full solution > exists on the branch `advanced-solution`. > > https://github.com/ververica/flink-statefun-workshop > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 8:34 AM Miguel Araú

Re: [Statefun] Dynamic behavior

available remote functions, for instance. Miguel Araújo escreveu no dia terça, 23/02/2021 à(s) 09:14: > Hi Gordon, Igal, > > Thanks for your replies. > PubSub would be a good addition, I have a few scenarios where that would > be useful. > > However, after reading your answers

Re: [Statefun] Dynamic behavior

e possible to use stateful functions to >> implement a pub-sub model in user space for the time being. I've actually >> left some ideas for implementing that in the comments of FLINK-16319. >> >> Cheers, >> Gordon >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 6:38 AM

[Statefun] Dynamic behavior

Hi everyone, What is the recommended way of achieving the equivalent of a broadcast in Flink when using Stateful Functions? For instance, assume we are implementing something similar to Flink's demo fraud detection but in