+1 for going with an optional parameter and change it for unique, firstUnique as well.
I was wondering whether specifying the duplicate event eviction strategy should be specifiable from the language itself. But I think it would be an overkill. So +1 for this approach. Thanks, Lasantha On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Sajith Ravindra <[email protected]> wrote: > I also think it's better to have an optional parameter for the two cases > rather than having two different windows. > > Since our convention was to consider 'first unique' as the special case we > can have a Boolean optional parameter such as 'isFirstUnique' to alter the > window behavior and let the default behavior to be 'last unique' > > > On Aug 25, 2016, at 7:47 PM, Dilini Muthumala <[email protected]> wrote: > > Good point, Lasantha. Thanks for bringing it up. > > In my point of view, going forward, it's better to have a parameter to a > Unique Window to specify whether to drop first event or the last event, > rather than having two windows as Unique Window and First Unique Window. > I think so, because otherwise we might end up having many unique windows > because for each unique window (length, time, length batch, time batch...), > we might have to write a first unique window as well. > > We can leave this parameter as an optional one, so in case it does not > matter whether to use 'first' or 'last', user can omit the parameter. > > If we assume that the common case would expect the last event to be kept > in window, then we can set the default value of the parameter to 'last'. > > WDYT? > > Thanks, > Dilini > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Lasantha Fernando <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> If we go by the basic unique window implementation we have, we have >> introduced two implementations (unique and firstUnique) [1.2]. If we go by >> that convention, we would have to create a separate window for the first >> unique implementations. >> >> I think the rational behind having a unique window and a firstUnique >> window was the assumption that the common case would expect the last event >> to be kept in window (in case of duplicates). firstUnique was considered a >> special case and kept separately so that users won't have to think about >> whether to use 'first' or 'last' in a scenario where it does not matter. >> >> Just wanted to raise this point so that this aspect and the overall >> consistency with the basic unique window implementation were also under >> discussion.. :-) >> >> [1] https://docs.wso2.com/display/CEP420/Inbuilt+Windows# >> InbuiltWindows-uniqueunique >> [2] https://docs.wso2.com/display/CEP420/Inbuilt+Windows# >> InbuiltWindows-firstUniquefirstUnique >> >> Thanks, >> Lasantha >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Rajjaz Mohammed <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Malith, >>> >>> +1, Will add in the implementation. >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Dilini Muthumala <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Malith Jayasinghe <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Dilini, >>>>> >>>>> Can we provide an option here to specify which event to be dropped >>>>> (i.e. earlier event or the later one)? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Malith, >>>> >>>> +1 to provide that option. >>>> >>>> Platform Extensions team, >>>> If we add that option, then I think, we'll have to add that support to >>>> all of the Unique windows which we have done (UniqueTimeWindow, >>>> UniqueLengthWindow, UniqueTimeBatchWindow and UniqueLengthBatchWindow) to >>>> keep consistency. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Dilini >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:40 AM, Dilini Muthumala <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Adding architecture list >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Dilini Muthumala <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As Rajjaz is working on implementing UniqueTimeBatchWindow and >>>>>>> UniqueLengthBatchWindow, we were discussing below design for the window: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As we know, UniqueTimeBatchWindow can be used to create a batch of >>>>>>> events, in such a way that the batch does not contain "duplicate >>>>>>> events". >>>>>>> (Here, I say two events are duplicate when those events have equal >>>>>>> values for a certain attribute. It does not mean that both the events >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> exactly the same) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This means, when we emit current events or expired events from the >>>>>>> window, those events cannot have duplicate events. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As such, when the window is collecting events to create a batch, >>>>>>> upon seeing a duplicate event, to keep the uniqueness in the batch, >>>>>>> one of the duplicates need to be dropped (UniqueTimeBatchWindow keeps >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> latest event in the batch, dropping the event which came earlier). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any concerns on dropping events in the window? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Dilini >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> *Dilini Muthumala* >>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>>>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *E-mail :* [email protected] >>>>>>> *Mobile: *+94 713-400-029 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> *Dilini Muthumala* >>>>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>>>> >>>>>> *E-mail :* [email protected] >>>>>> *Mobile: *+94 713-400-029 >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Architecture mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Malith Jayasinghe >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> WSO2, Inc. (http://wso2.com) >>>>> Email : [email protected] >>>>> Mobile : 0770704040 >>>>> Lean . Enterprise . Middleware >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Architecture mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> *Dilini Muthumala* >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>> >>>> *E-mail :* [email protected] >>>> *Mobile: *+94 713-400-029 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Architecture mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thank you >>> Best Regards >>> >>> *Rajjaz HM* >>> Associate Software Engineer >>> Platform Extension Team >>> WSO2 Inc. <http://wso2.com/> >>> lean | enterprise | middleware >>> Mobile | +94752833834|+94777226874 >>> Email | [email protected] >>> LinkedIn <https://lk.linkedin.com/in/hmohammedrajjaz> | Blogger >>> <http://rajjazhm.blogspot.com/> | WSO2 Profile >>> <http://wso2.com/about/team/mohammer-rajjaz/> >>> [image: https://wso2.com/signature] <https://wso2.com/signature> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Architecture mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Architecture mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture >> >> > > > -- > *Dilini Muthumala* > Senior Software Engineer, > WSO2 Inc. > > *E-mail :* [email protected] > *Mobile: *+94 713-400-029 > > _______________________________________________ > Architecture mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture > > > _______________________________________________ > Architecture mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture > >
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
