Hi all, Hopefully the share permissions are correct on the doc now:
<goog_1394670011> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X0pS9uwevn16nYYqrGjEvWQMWQLwti7Q0hmW6lmgyk8/edit?usp=sharing Look forward to hearing what you think. Also is it worth making an issue for this? Cheers, Tom Cooper W: www.tomcooper.org.uk | Twitter: @tomncooper <https://twitter.com/tomncooper> On 30 March 2018 at 20:05, Karthik Ramasamy <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Tom. It will be a great addition. Unable to access the doc. Could > you give permission? > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Mar 30, 2018, at 6:08 PM, Thomas Cooper <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > After chatting to the Heron Team at Twitter and Microsoft I have written > up > > a proposal for giving Heron the ability to preserve state across a > topology > > update (change in component parallelism). This is problem for components > > with incoming fields based connections as keys will not hash to the same > > task ID after an update. I have defined the problem (as I see it) and > > propsoed two solutions in the google doc below: > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X0pS9uwevn16nYYqrGjEvWQMWQLwt > i7Q0hmW6lmgyk8/edit?usp=sharing > > > > I would love to get feedback on these proposals. Feel free to blow holes > in > > my assumptions and correct any misinterpretations I have made! > > > > Thanks, > > > > Tom Cooper > > W: www.tomcooper.org.uk | Twitter: @tomncooper > > <https://twitter.com/tomncooper> >
