Hi Jungtaek Lim,
Nice to hear from you again since last time we talked :) and congrats on
becoming a Spark committer in the meantime ! (if I'm not mistaking you
were not at the time)
I totally agree with what you're saying on merging structural parts of
Spark without having a broader consensus. What I don't understand is why
there is not more investment in SS. Especially because in another thread
the community is discussing about deprecating the regular DStream
streaming framework.
Is the orientation of Spark now mostly batch ?
PS: yeah I saw your update on the doc when I took a look at 3.0 preview
2 searching for this particular feature. And regarding the workaround,
I'm not sure it meets my needs as it will add delays and also may mess
up with watermarks.
Best
Etienne Chauchot
On 04/09/2020 08:06, Jungtaek Lim wrote:
Unfortunately I don't see enough active committers working on
Structured Streaming; I don't expect major features/improvements can
be brought in this situation.
Technically I can review and merge the PR on major improvements in SS,
but that depends on how huge the proposal is changing. If the proposal
brings conceptual change, being reviewed by a committer wouldn't still
be enough.
So that's not due to the fact we think it's worthless. (That might be
only me though.) I'd understand as there's not much investment on SS.
There's also a known workaround for multiple aggregations (I've
documented in the SS guide doc, in "Limitation of global watermark"
section), though I totally agree the workaround is bad.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 12:28 AM Etienne Chauchot <echauc...@apache.org
<mailto:echauc...@apache.org>> wrote:
Hi all,
I'm also very interested in this feature but the PR is open since
January 2019 and was not updated. It raised a design discussion
around watermarks and a design doc was written
(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IAH9UQJPUiUCLd7H6dazRK2k1szDX38SnM6GVNZYvUo/edit#heading=h.npkueh4bbkz1).
We also commented this design but no matter what it seems that the
subject is still stale.
Is there any interest in the community in delivering this feature
or is it considered worthless ? If the latter, can you explain why ?
Best
Etienne
On 22/05/2019 03:38, 张万新 wrote:
Thanks, I'll check it out.
Arun Mahadevan <ar...@apache.org <mailto:ar...@apache.org>> 于
2019年5月21日周二 01:31写道：
Heres the proposal for supporting it in "append" mode -
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/23576. You could see if
it addresses your requirement and post your feedback in the PR.
For "update" mode its going to be much harder to support this
without first adding support for "retractions", otherwise we
would end up with wrong results.
- Arun
On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 01:34, Gabor Somogyi
<gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com
<mailto:gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
There is PR for this but not yet merged.
On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 10:13 AM 张万新
<kevinzwx1...@gmail.com <mailto:kevinzwx1...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
Hi there,
I'd like to know what's the root reason why multiple
aggregations on streaming dataframe is not allowed
since it's a very useful feature, and flink has
supported it for a long time.
Thanks.
