[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7101?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16074330#comment-16074330
]
sunjincheng commented on FLINK-7101:
------------------------------------
Hi [~fhueske] I think:
1. We need the retraction records if {{inputCnt == 0}};
2. For current tableAPI/SQL, we should ignore retraction records if {{inputCnt
< 0}} (when cleanup state);
3. You are right we should change the condition {{ if
(prevRow.row.equals(newRow.row)) }} to {{ if (prevRow.row.equals(newRow.row) &&
!stateCleaningEnabled)}}
BTW, if we can set the parallel of operator(in the future), we also need change
the current build-in {{SumWithRetractAggFunction}} getValue logic:
{code}
override def getValue(acc: SumWithRetractAccumulator[T]): T = {
if (acc.f1 > 0) { *====> acc.f1 != 0*
acc.f0
} else {
null.asInstanceOf[T]
}
}
{code}
The reason is:
!screenshot-1.png!
What do you think?
> Fix Non-windowed group-aggregate error when using `minIdleStateRetentionTime`
> config and retract agg
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-7101
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7101
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Table API & SQL
> Affects Versions: 1.3.0, 1.3.1
> Reporter: sunjincheng
> Assignee: sunjincheng
> Fix For: 1.4.0
>
> Attachments: screenshot-1.png
>
>
> When Non-windowed group-aggregate using {{minIdleStateRetentionTime}} config
> and retract AGG, Will emit "NULL" agg value which we do not expect.
> For example: ({{IntSumWithRetractAggFunction}})
> 1. Receive: CRow(Row.of(6L: JLong, 5: JInt, "aaa"), true)
> 2. Cleanup state
> 3. Receive: CRow(Row.of(6L: JLong, 5: JInt, "aaa"), false) // acc.f1 = -1,
> getValue= null
> So, we must change the logic of {{GroupAggProcessFunction}} as follows:
> {code}
> if (inputCnt != 0) {
> ...
> } else {
> ...
> }
> {code}
> TO
> {code}
> if (inputCnt > 0) {
> ...
> } else {
> if( null != prevRow.row){
> ...
> }
> }
> {code}
> In this case, the result will bigger than expected, but i think it's make
> sense, because user want cleanup state.(they should know the impact)
> What do you think? [~fhueske] [~hequn8128]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
