+1 to add Stateful Function to FLINK core repository. Best, tison.
Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> 于2019年10月14日周一 下午4:16写道： > +1 to adding Stateful Function to Flink. It is a very useful addition to > the Flink ecosystem. > > Given this is essentially a new top-level / first-citizen API of Flink, it > seems better to have it the Flink core repo. This will also avoid letting > this important new API to be blocked on potential problems of maintaining > multiple different repositories. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 4:48 AM Hequn Cheng <chenghe...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Stephan, >> >> Big +1 for adding this to Apache Flink! >> >> As for the problem of whether this should be added to the Flink main >> repository, from my side, I prefer to put it in the main repository. Not >> only Stateful Functions shares very close relations with the current Flink, >> but also other libs or modules in Flink can make use of it the other way >> round in the future. At that time the Flink API stack would also be changed >> a bit and this would be cool. >> >> Best, Hequn >> >> On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 9:16 PM Biao Liu <mmyy1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Stehpan, >>> >>> +1 for having Stateful Functions in Flink. >>> >>> Before discussing which repository it should belong, I was wondering if >>> we have reached an agreement of "splitting flink repository" as Piotr >>> mentioned or not. It seems that it's just no more further discussion. >>> It's OK for me to add it to core repository. After all almost everything >>> is in core repository now. But if we decide to split the core repository >>> someday, I tend to create a separate repository for Stateful Functions. It >>> might be good time to take the first step of splitting. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Biao /'bɪ.aʊ/ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 19:31, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Stephan, >>>> >>>> Big +1 for adding stateful functions to Flink. I believe a lot of user >>>> would be interested to try this out and I could imagine how this could >>>> contribute to reduce the TCO for business requiring both streaming >>>> processing and stateful functions. >>>> >>>> And my 2 cents is to put it into flink core repository since I could >>>> see a tight connection between this library and flink state. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Yu >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 at 17:31, jincheng sun <sunjincheng...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Stephan, >>>>> >>>>> bit +1 for adding this great features to Apache Flink. >>>>> >>>>> Regarding where we should place it, put it into Flink core repository >>>>> or create a separate repository? I prefer put it into main repository and >>>>> looking forward the more detail discussion for this decision. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Jincheng >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jingsong Li <jingsongl...@gmail.com> 于2019年10月12日周六 上午11:32写道： >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Stephan, >>>>>> >>>>>> big +1 for this contribution. It provides another user interface that >>>>>> is easy to use and popular at this time. these functions, It's hard for >>>>>> users to write in SQL/TableApi, while using DataStream is too complex. >>>>>> (We've done some stateFun kind jobs using DataStream before). With >>>>>> statefun, it is very easy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it's also a good opportunity to exercise Flink's core >>>>>> capabilities. I looked at stateful-functions-flink briefly, it is very >>>>>> interesting. I think there are many other things Flink can improve. So I >>>>>> think it's a better thing to put it into Flink, and the improvement for >>>>>> it >>>>>> will be more natural in the future. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> Jingsong Lee >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 7:33 PM Dawid Wysakowicz < >>>>>> dwysakow...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Stephan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think this is a nice library, but what I like more about it is >>>>>>> that it suggests exploring different use-cases. I think it definitely >>>>>>> makes >>>>>>> sense for the Flink community to explore more lightweight applications >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> reuses resources. Therefore I definitely think it is a good idea for >>>>>>> Flink >>>>>>> community to accept this contribution and help maintaining it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Personally I'd prefer to have it in a separate repository. There >>>>>>> were a few discussions before where different people were suggesting to >>>>>>> extract connectors and other libraries to separate repositories. >>>>>>> Moreover I >>>>>>> think it could serve as an example for the Flink ecosystem website[1]. >>>>>>> This >>>>>>> could be the first project in there and give a good impression that the >>>>>>> community sees potential in the ecosystem website. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lastly, I'm wondering if this should go through PMC vote according >>>>>>> to our bylaws[2]. In the end the suggestion is to adopt an existing code >>>>>>> base as is. It also proposes a new programs concept that could result >>>>>>> in a >>>>>>> shift of priorities for the community in a long run. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dawid >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Create-a-Flink-ecosystem-website-td27519.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Bylaws >>>>>>> On 11/10/2019 13:12, Till Rohrmann wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Stephan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 for adding stateful functions to Flink. I believe the new set of >>>>>>> applications this feature will unlock will be super interesting for new >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> existing Flink users alike. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One reason for not including it in the main repository would to not >>>>>>> being bound to Flink's release cadence. This would allow to release >>>>>>> faster >>>>>>> and more often. However, I believe that having it eventually in Flink's >>>>>>> main repository would be beneficial in the long run. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Till >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 12:56 PM Trevor Grant < >>>>>>> trevor.d.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 non-binding on contribution. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Separate repo, or feature branch to start maybe? I just feel like >>>>>>>> in the beginning this thing is going to have lots of breaking changes >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> maybe aren't going to fit well with tests / other "v1+" release code. >>>>>>>> Just >>>>>>>> my .02. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 4:38 AM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dear Flink Community! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Some of you probably heard it already: On Tuesday, at Flink >>>>>>>>> Forward Berlin, we announced **Stateful Functions**. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stateful Functions is a library on Flink to implement general >>>>>>>>> purpose applications. It is built around stateful functions (who >>>>>>>>> would have >>>>>>>>> thunk) >>>>>>>>> that can communicate arbitrarily through messages, have consistent >>>>>>>>> state, and a small resource footprint. They are a bit like keyed >>>>>>>>> ProcessFunctions >>>>>>>>> that can send each other messages. >>>>>>>>> As simple as this sounds, this means you can now communicate in >>>>>>>>> non-DAG patterns, so it allows users to build programs they cannot >>>>>>>>> build >>>>>>>>> with Flink. >>>>>>>>> It also has other neat properties, like multiplexing of functions, >>>>>>>>> modular composition, tooling both container-based deployments and >>>>>>>>> as-a-Flink-job deployments. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You can find out more about it here >>>>>>>>> - Website: https://statefun.io/ >>>>>>>>> - Code: https://github.com/ververica/stateful-functions >>>>>>>>> - Talk with motivation: >>>>>>>>> https://speakerdeck.com/stephanewen/stateful-functions-building-general-purpose-applications-and-services-on-apache-flink?slide=12 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now for the main issue: **We would like to contribute this project >>>>>>>>> to Apache Flink** >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I believe that this is a great fit for both sides. >>>>>>>>> For the Flink community, it would be a way to extend the >>>>>>>>> capabilities and use cases of Flink into a completely different type >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> applications and thus grow the community into this new field. >>>>>>>>> Many discussions recently about evolving the Flink runtime (both >>>>>>>>> on the mailing list and at conferences) show the interest in Flink >>>>>>>>> users in >>>>>>>>> the space that Stateful Functions covers. >>>>>>>>> It seems natural that Stateful Functions should closely co-develop >>>>>>>>> with Apache Flink, ideally as part of the project. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There are many details to be discusses, for example whether this >>>>>>>>> should be added to the Flink core repository, or whether we and to >>>>>>>>> create a >>>>>>>>> separate repository >>>>>>>>> for this. But I think we should start discussing this after we >>>>>>>>> have consensus on whether the community wants this contribution. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Really looking forward to hear what you think! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>> Stephan >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Best, Jingsong Lee >>>>>> >>>>>
