I could do that, but I was under the impression that 2 or more disparate broadcast states could be provided to a keyed stream, referenced through a key in the Map State...That would be cleaner as in the fact that 2 different set of rules are to be applied are explictely declared rather then carries inside the datums of a unioned stream...... I will look at second option...
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018, 9:15 AM Xingcan Cui <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Vishal, > > You could try 1) merging these two rule streams first with the `union` > method if they get the same type or 2) connecting them and encapsulate the > records from both sides to a unified type (e.g., scala Either). > > Best, > Xingcan > > > On Sep 18, 2018, at 8:59 PM, Vishal Santoshi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I have 2 broadcast streams that carry rules to be applied to a third > keyed stream. The connect method of the keyed stream only takes a single > broadcast stream. How do I connect the 2 broadcast stream to that single > keyed stream. > > > > Do I have 2 connects and thus 2 instances of BroadcastConnextedStream, > union them and then apply process through a single > SingleOutpitStreamOperator ? The issue I see there are 2 keyBy calls and an > additional shuffle before connect is called. > > > > To be precise, is there a simple example of applying 2 dissimilar rules > through 2 broadcast streams, thus 2 different MapStateDiscriptors, to a > single keyed stream without any unnecessary overhead... > > > > > > > >
