I think that we should try make modules interchangeable with operators
as much as possible, so that applications (the same applies to modules)
designer can replace a module with a functional equivalent operator or
replace an operator with a functional equivalent module. In certain
context modules should behave like operators and be indistinguishable
from operators. Taking this into account, I think that using a module
and an operator with the same name within DAG namespace should not be
allowed. It still should be possible to have an operator in the DAG with
the same name as another operator added to a module belonging to the DAG
as module's DAG has its own namespace.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 10/12/15 12:30, Timothy Farkas wrote:
I think using the module keyword in configurations helps to reduce
confusing corner cases. There are four cases/things I don't like about
using the operator keyword for both operators and modules:
1. A module with the same name as one of its internal operators
2. A module with the same name as another operator in the dag.
3. When there are module specific attributes, things could get
unnecessarily messy in the configuration handling code
4. Confusing the user by giving them the impression that modules and
operators are the same thing when they're not.
Thanks,
Tim
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Tushar Gosavi <[email protected]>
wrote:
I was thinking from more of the view that module and operator can share a
same name in the DAG. In this case it is necessary to distinguish between
operator and module. If we don't want this behavior, and if its ok to use
operator keyword to set module property then we can treat them as operators
while setting properties, In fact, I think by doing this we could reuse
property setting code for operator.
- Tushar.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Vlad Rozov <[email protected]>
wrote:
Is it necessary to distinguish modules from operators when setting
modules
properties? Unless it is necessary to set module internal operator
properties it may be better to treat modules the same way as operators.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 10/12/15 04:40, Tushar Gosavi wrote:
Hi All,
As part of module support we will allow specifying module properties
through
external configuration files. The format will be similar to the
operator,
instead of operator keyword we will use module keyword for properties
on module.
dt.application.<appname>.module.<modulename>.prop.<propertyname>=<value>
dt.application.<appname>.module.<modulename>.<propertyname>=<value>
dt.module.<modulename>.prop.<propertyname>=<value>
dt.module.<modulename>.<propertyname>=<value>
Setting attribute on the module.
dt.application.<appname>.module.<modulename>.attr.<moduleattr>=<value>
dt.module.<modulename>.attr.<moduleattr>=<value>
There are no module attributes defined now, but we will add them in
future
like
whether to group operators during parallel partitioning.
Setting attribute on a module port.
dt.module.<modulename>.port.<portname>.attr.<attributename>
The port attributes will be transferred to the internal operator port
where
it is
mapped to.
Please let us know, If we are missing something, or some syntax need
changes.
Regards,
- Tushar.
