The Configuration parameter in open() is a relic of the previous java
API where operators were instantiated generically.
Nowadays, this is no longer the case as they are serialized instead,
which simplifies the passing of parameters as you can
simply store them in a field of your UDF.
The configuration object passed to open() in case of the streaming API
is always empty, and we don't plan
to implement it since it provides little value due to the above.
As such, we suggest to pass either the parameter tool, configuration
instance or specific parameters through the constructor of user-defined
functions and store them in a field. This applies both to the batch and
streaming API.
Personally i would stay away from the global configuration option as it
is more brittle than the constructor approach, which makes
it explicit that this function requires these parameters.
On 11.10.2017 00:36, Colin Williams wrote:
I was looking for withParameters(config) in the Streaming API today. I
stumbled across the following thread.
http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/withParameters-for-Streaming-API-td9332.html#a9333
<http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/withParameters-for-Streaming-API-td9332.html#a9333>
It appears that some of the StreamingAPI developers are in favor of
removing the parameters from RichMapFunctions' open. However the best
practices article
https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.3/dev/best_practices.html#using-the-parameters-in-your-flink-program
Show examples of using both global configuration (where parameters are
available from open) and withParameters(config) (which doesn't work
from the Streaming API)
I'm trying to make a decision regarding using global parameters with
my Flink Streaming jobs.
Is using the global configuration a good idea for parameters in the
Streaming API or is this best practice just suggested for the Batch API?
Is there a reason for the opinion of removing the configuration
parameters from open?
