Oh ok thats a bit far off. Is there any chance of a backport of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6208 to the 1.2 branch? I require the SKIP_TILL_NEXT behaviour for a production use case that we want to use Flink for.
Moiz On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Kostas Kloudas <k.klou...@data-artisans.com > wrote: > The 1.3 is scheduled for the beginning of June. > > Cheers, > Kostas > > On Apr 29, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Moiz S Jinia <moiz.ji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Dawid! > Yes thats what i was expecting. I'll give it a try. > > When do you expect 1.3.0 stable to be out? > > Moiz > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Dawid Wysakowicz < > wysakowicz.da...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> This is an expected behaviour. After the "ar" event there still may occur >> other "ar" event that will also trigger a match. >> To be more generic in all versions prior to 1.3.0 there are two different >> consuming strategies: >> >> - STRICT (the next operator) - that accepts only if the event occurs >> directly after the previous >> - SKIP TILL ANY (the followedBy operator) - it accepts any matching >> event following event if there were already an event that matched this >> pattern >> >> Because after "ni" event we could match with some other "ar" events, the >> match is timeouted after 5 seconds. >> >> In FLINK-6208 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6208> we >> introduced third consuming strategy: >> >> - SKIP TILL NEXT(this is the strategy for followedBy right now) - the >> event does not have to occur directly after the previous one but only one >> event can be matched >> >> and you can still use SKIP TILL ANY by using followedByAny. I believe the >> SKIP TILL NEXT strategy is the one you expected. >> You can check it on master branch. We did introduce lots of new features >> and bugfixes to CEP for 1.3.0 version so any comments, >> tests or suggestions are welcome. >> >> >> Z pozdrowieniami! / Cheers! >> >> Dawid Wysakowicz >> *Data/Software Engineer* >> Skype: dawid_wys | Twitter: @OneMoreCoder >> <http://getindata.com/> >> >> 2017-04-29 12:14 GMT+02:00 Moiz S Jinia <moiz.ji...@gmail.com>: >> >>> When using "next", this pattern works fine for the both a match as well >>> as a timeout: >>> >>> Pattern<Event, Event> pattern = Pattern.<Event>begin("start") >>> .where(evt -> evt.value.equals("ni")) >>> .next("last").where(evt -> evt.value.equals("ar")).within >>> (Time.seconds(5)); >>> >>> 1. "ni" then "ar" within 5 seconds - triggers match >>> 2. "ni" then no "ar" within 5 seconds - triggers timeout >>> >>> But with "followedBy", this does not behave as expected: >>> >>> Pattern<Event, Event> pattern = Pattern.<Event>begin("start") >>> .where(evt -> evt.value.equals("ni")) >>> .followedBy("last").where(evt -> evt.value.equals("ar")).within >>> (Time.seconds(5)); >>> >>> "ni" then "ar" within 5 seconds - triggers match and also triggers >>> timeout. >>> >>> Why is the timeout triggered when using followedBy (when there is a >>> match)? >>> >>> Version - 1.1.5. >>> >> >> > >
