Hi Mansi, For using the IoTDB table mode API, you can refer to IoTDB's table session examples[1] as well as the examples in the spark-iotdb-table-connector[2] for practical insights and implementation patterns.
Additionally, a best practice for participating in open source projects is to send or CC your emails to the mailing list, such as IoTDB's dev list at [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>. This way, all subscribed iotdb community members can provide help. If you have any more questions or need further clarification, feel free to reach out. Best regards, Haonan [1] https://github.com/apache/iotdb/tree/master/example/session/src/main/java/org/apache/iotdb [2] https://github.com/apache/iotdb-extras/tree/master/connectors/spark-iotdb-table-connector > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Mansi Maanu <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: GSoC 2026 Interest — Flink Connector for IoTDB 2.X Table Mode > Date: February 24, 2026 at 1:49:42 PM GMT+8 > To: Haonan Hou <[email protected]> > > Hi Haonan, > > Thank you for the detailed response, this really helps me plan the > proposal and contribution work. > > Good to know the table mode connector will be a separate module (the > spark-iotdb-connector is a helpful reference) and that the Flink Table > API is the priority for the MVP. I'll scope my proposal around core > read/write operations via the Table API first, with DataStream API as > a stretch goal. > > I've started browsing the open issues and will pick one to get a feel > for the codebase conventions before the proposal deadline. If I run > into anything while working on it, I'll follow up on the dev list. One > quick follow-up: for the Table API integration, is there an existing > IoTDB session management pattern you'd recommend reusing (like what's > done in the JDBC connector), or would a fresh design be preferred > given the 2.X changes? > > Thanks again for your time! > > Best, > Mansi Singh > Northeastern University > GitHub: https://github.com/MansiSingh17 > > On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 at 18:13, Haonan Hou <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Mansi, >> >> Thank you for reaching out and for your interest in the Flink Connector for >> IoTDB 2.X Table Mode project for GSoC 2026. It's exciting to see your >> background in Apache Beam (congrats on those merged PRs!) and your >> familiarity with Java and distributed systems—this aligns well with the work >> involved. It's also great that you're already reviewing the existing >> flink-iotdb-connector; that's a solid starting point. To address your >> questions: 1. We expect the table mode connector to be built as a separate >> module, similar to how the spark-iotdb-connector is structured. 2. For the >> initial implementation, there's a preference to prioritize the Flink Table >> API. This is the primary integration point for many users and will help >> achieve a minimal viable product (MVP) for core read/write operations more >> efficiently. Once that's solid, we can expand to the DataStream API if time >> allows. 3. This task has had other prospective contributors express >> interest, but no one is currently assigned or actively working on it in an >> official capacity. Per the GSoC process, the scope remains open, and there >> will be a contributor application and approval phase later on to select >> participants. Regarding a small contribution to get familiar with the IoTDB >> codebase, that's a fantastic idea. You can directly browse the open issues >> at https://github.com/apache/iotdb/issues and pick one to work on. If you >> have more questions or want feedback on your proposal ideas, don't hesitate >> to follow up. Looking forward to seeing your contributions! Best regards, >> Haonan Hou >> >> >> On Feb 22, 2026, at 4:27 AM, Mansi Maanu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi Haonan, >> >> I'm Mansi Singh, a Master's student in Information Systems at Northeastern >> University, and I'm interested in working on the Flink Connector for IoTDB >> 2.X Table Mode project for GSoC 2026. >> >> I've been contributing to Apache Beam's Python SDK — my merged PRs include >> #37672 (fix GroupBy snippet tests) and #37674 (make GCS filesystem lookup >> lazy to match S3 behavior). I also have experience with Java and distributed >> systems, and I've been reading through the existing flink-iotdb-connector to >> understand how the tree mode connector is structured before diving into the >> table mode work. >> >> A few questions to help me get started: >> 1. Should the table mode connector be built as a separate module from the >> existing flink-iotdb-connector, or extend it? >> 2. Is there a preference for targeting Flink's DataStream API, Table API, or >> both for the initial implementation? >> 3. Is anyone already working on this, or is the scope fully open for GSoC? >> >> I'd love to make a small contribution to the IoTDB codebase before the >> proposal deadline to get familiar with the project. Is there a good first >> issue you'd recommend? >> >> Thank you for your time! >> >> Best, >> Mansi Singh >> Northeastern University >> GitHub: https://github.com/MansiSingh17 >>
