Thanks for the detailed explanation regarding the reasoning behind not using opens' configuration parameters!
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 1:46 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > 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 > > 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? > > > > >
