fhueske commented on code in PR #27935:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/27935#discussion_r3093856128
##########
flink-table/flink-table-planner/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/table/planner/plan/nodes/exec/stream/ProcessTableFunctionTestUtils.java:
##########
@@ -664,7 +667,12 @@ public static class OptionalOnTimeFunction extends
AppendProcessTableFunctionBas
public void eval(Context ctx, @ArgumentHint(SET_SEMANTIC_TABLE) Row r)
{
final TimeContext<Long> timeCtx = ctx.timeContext(Long.class);
collectEvalEvent(timeCtx, r);
- collectCreateTimer(timeCtx, "t", 2);
+ Long wm = timeCtx.currentWatermark();
+ // Register at wm+1 to always target the immediate next watermark:
the timer fires
+ // exactly once per watermark advance, and each new row
re-registers the timer for the
+ // following watermark step, demonstrating repeated timer
re-registration.
+ long timer = wm == null || wm < 0 ? 1 : wm + 1;
Review Comment:
This is just a function for testing purposes and we assert against the
behavior that we implement.
So I think it doesn't really matter.
Or is there an (edge) case that would be covered with your suggestion that
isn't with the current version?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
