+1 for common abstract class and specific implementations that are use case specific.
Regards, Ashwin. On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Devendra Tagare <[email protected]> wrote: > + 1 for a common Abstract Class. > > 0 - for adding ports. > > Use-case for CSV - data migration from columnar stores.Some users may want > to move TB's of data from a store like Greenplum and then do > transformations using the CSV parser that is already present. > > Thanks, > Dev > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Yogi Devendra <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 for Tushar's idea for common abstract class. > > > > Additionally, POJO based output should be considered for active > > development. CSV output can be deprecated. Since it can be achieved > easily > > using POJO + CSV formatter. > > > > Operators are meant to be lego blocks for reusable functionality to > achieve > > higher level functionality by clubbing multiple operators together. > > > > > > ~ Yogi > > > > On 8 August 2016 at 17:45, Tushar Gosavi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I would prefer a common abstract class having emitTuple method. And > > > two different implementation one for emitting comma separated values > > > and other emitting pojo. > > > > > > Regards, > > > -Tushar. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Priyanka Gugale > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The concrete implementation is supposed to do mainly formatting of > > input > > > > data and emit in required form. Also it would be tricky to implement > > some > > > > abstract methods like "getTuple", you have to conditionally return > the > > > > values. > > > > > > > > -Priyanka > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Bhupesh Chawda <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I am +1 for having two ports in the same concrete implementation. > > > >> One port for POJOs and second one for CSV strings (if this is > actually > > > >> needed) > > > >> > > > >> +0 on having multiple concrete operators. > > > >> I don't think it is necessary to create multiple concrete > > > implementations > > > >> just because we want the same data in different formats. Ports > should > > > serve > > > >> the purpose. > > > >> > > > >> ~ Bhupesh > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Priyanka Gugale < > > > [email protected]> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > > > > >> > JDBCPollerInputOperator in malhar repository emits comma separated > > > list > > > >> of > > > >> > values as result of scan. As most of our input operators emit > POJOs > > I > > > am > > > >> > planning to add an implementation which emits pojo. > > > >> > > > > >> > I would like to discuss, if we should have two independent jdbc > poll > > > >> input > > > >> > operators, one emits csv and other which emits pojo or we should > > have > > > one > > > >> > operator having two ports? > > > >> > > > > >> > I prefer two operators to define clear intent of each operator, > but > > if > > > >> > anyone has different opinion please suggest. > > > >> > > > > >> > -Priyanka > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > -- Regards, Ashwin.
