I think if you explain what A and B are in the beginning, it makes sense to use them since readers would know who they reference.
Cheers On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Jan Filipiak <jan.filip...@trivago.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for the remarks. hope I didn't miss any. > Not even sure if it makes sense to introduce A and B or just stick with > "this ktable", "other ktable" > > Thank you > Jan > > > On 27.10.2017 06:58, Ted Yu wrote: > >> Do you mind addressing my previous comments ? >> >> http://search-hadoop.com/m/Kafka/uyzND1hzF8SRzUqb?subj=Re+ >> DISCUSS+KIP+213+Support+non+key+joining+in+KTable >> >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Jan Filipiak <jan.filip...@trivago.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello everyone, >>> >>> this is the new discussion thread after the ID-clash. >>> >>> Best >>> Jan >>> >>> ______ >>> >>> >>> Hello Kafka-users, >>> >>> I want to continue with the development of KAFKA-3705, which allows the >>> Streams DSL to perform KTableKTable-Joins when the KTables have a >>> one-to-many relationship. >>> To make sure we cover the requirements of as many users as possible and >>> have a good solution afterwards I invite everyone to read through the >>> KIP I >>> put together and discuss it here in this Thread. >>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-213+ >>> Support+non-key+joining+in+KTable >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3705 >>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/3720 >>> >>> I think a public discussion and vote on a solution is exactly what is >>> needed to bring this feauture into kafka-streams. I am looking forward to >>> everyones opinion! >>> >>> Please keep the discussion on the mailing list rather than commenting on >>> the wiki (wiki discussions get unwieldy fast). >>> >>> Best >>> Jan >>> >>> >>> >>> > > >
