Hi Becket, Timo, I just wanted to jump in as well, as the author of FLIP-498.
This FLIP has been subsumed by FLIP-498: AsyncTableFunction for async > table function support [1]. In the discussion for FLIP-498, we decided > to discard FLIP-313 as it has been abandoned for a while. This was the intention, due to the inactivity of FLIP-313. They are similar. I hope this is ok for everyone. @Alan might give some timeline when this > feature will land? This PR for FLIP-498 is out https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26567. It can be completed soon, if I get a review for it. I'm hoping it'll be merged in the next week. >From the FLIP-498 discussion thread, it is unclear to me whether people had > agreed to "discard" FLIP-313. The FLIP-498 discussion mentioned that we > may potentially still add the hint based options later, which is what was > proposed in FLIP-313. And I think we already see use cases in per > function instance options instead of job level configs. Hint support seems like a good set of functionality, though was out of scope for FLIP-498. If we wanted to re-activate FLIP-313 to focus on this (or create a new FLIP, if that is more appropriate) that seems good to me. Happy to discuss this and coordinate, so we don't have duplicate discussions/implementations and can figure out how they fit together. Thanks, Alan On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 5:43 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Becket, > > sorry if my -1 was too rude in this case. I thought the VOTE is just > outdated and should be restarted, including a fresh FLIP number and > discussion for it. > > If it is just about the hint based options approach, I don't have a > strong opinion and I'm sure we can evolve FLIP-498 further once it is > implemented. > > > BTW, I feel that we can do better in dealing with similar FLIPs from > > different contributors as well as FLIPs dormant for long. I'll start a > > separate discussion on that rather than derail this thread. > > I totally agree. I'm not sure if we have a process in the by-laws > already, if not we should add one. A VOTE that stays around for longer > than 6 month or so should be treated as rejected. In the end, all what > matters is to get the feature in and avoid discussions around > overlapping design docs. > > Regards, > Timo > > > On 27.05.25 03:57, Becket Qin wrote: > > Thanks for pointing to FLIP-498, Timo. I missed that. > > > >>From the FLIP-498 discussion thread, it is unclear to me whether people > had > > agreed to "discard" FLIP-313. The FLIP-498 discussion mentioned that we > may > > potentially still add the hint based options later, which is what was > > proposed in FLIP-313. And I think we already see use cases in per > function > > instance options instead of job level configs. > > > > @Timo, can you clarify that by -1, do you want to veto the technical > > proposal of FLIP-313, or do you mean you want to have yet another FLIP > > (other than FLIP-498) to add the hint based options? And why? > > > > BTW, I feel that we can do better in dealing with similar FLIPs from > > different contributors as well as FLIPs dormant for long. I'll start a > > separate discussion on that rather than derail this thread. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:22 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> -1 > >> > >> This FLIP has been subsumed by FLIP-498: AsyncTableFunction for async > >> table function support [1]. In the discussion for FLIP-498, we decided > >> to discard FLIP-313 as it has been abandoned for a while. > >> > >> I hope this is ok for everyone. @Alan might give some timeline when this > >> feature will land? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Timo > >> > >> > >> [1] > >> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-498%3A+AsyncTableFunction+for+async+table+function+support > >> > >> > >> On 26.05.25 07:51, Teunissen, F.G.J. (Fred) wrote: > >>> +1 (non-binding) > >>> > >>> We currently use a custom async table source and join it using FOR > >> SYSTEM TIME AS OF .... This approach has some challenges, especially > when > >> used after aggregations . > >>> > >>> Introducing support for an async UDTF would allow us to perform the > join > >> using LATERAL TABLE, which would greatly simplify the query structure > and > >> improve maintainability. > >>> > >>> Kind regards, > >>> Fred Teunissen > >>> > >>> From: Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> > >>> Date: Thursday, 22 May 2025 at 17:08 > >>> To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] FLIP-313: Add support of User Defined > >> AsyncTableFunction > >>> > >>> I just realized this FLIP has never been voted to pass. > >>> > >>> +1 to the FLIP. > >>> This is actually something long overdue. I feel it is even more like a > >> bug > >>> that we need to fix than a feature. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 7:36 PM Aitozi <gjying1...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi devs: > >>>> The last comments in [1] has been addressed, I'd like to restart > >> this > >>>> vote thread. > >>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours (until June 29th, 10:00AM > >> GMT) > >>>> unless there is an objection or an insufficient number of votes. > >>>> > >>>> [1] > >> > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread%2F7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969844437%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sD%2Fwr7xdTScWh464iYJLgzW%2BdE0toaLGloZ5Jtmz%2F1U%3D&reserved=0 > >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l> > >>>> [2] > >>>> > >>>> > >> > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FFLINK%2FFLIP-313%253A%2BAdd%2Bsupport%2Bof%2BUser%2BDefined%2BAsyncTableFunction&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969866359%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IP%2FRjxDZqex0oXzKW58jAElrr7aWFu%2FNsouo7aYWB1E%3D&reserved=0 > >> < > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-313%3A+Add+support+of+User+Defined+AsyncTableFunction > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> Aitozi > >>>> > >>>> Aitozi <gjying1...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月14日周三 09:47写道： > >>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> Thanks for all the feedback about FLIP-313: Add support of User > >>>>> Defined AsyncTableFunction[1]. Based on the discussion [2], we have > >> come > >>>> to > >>>>> a consensus, so I would like to start a vote. > >>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours (until June 19th, 10:00AM > >>>> GMT) > >>>>> unless there is an objection or an insufficient number of votes. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> [1] > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FFLINK%2FFLIP-313%253A%2BAdd%2Bsupport%2Bof%2BUser%2BDefined%2BAsyncTableFunction&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969879042%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=q7wFos19f0UtOLW6q0HhrtzGKS5THv5uQtLCxc3ZzfA%3D&reserved=0 > >> < > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-313%3A+Add+support+of+User+Defined+AsyncTableFunction > >>> > >>>>> [2] > >> > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread%2F7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969891732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=k5EGhhb5tWkqRLRY%2F1fuNJqCaKvtQB7vKFtbuwPkVPk%3D&reserved=0 > >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l> > >>>>> > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Aitozi > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> ATTENTION: > >>> The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the > >> intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or > >> disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the > message > >> immediately. > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> > > > >
