ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-7384:

GitHub user dawidwys opened a pull request:


    [FLINK-7384][cep] Unify event and processing time handling in the Abs…

    *Thank you very much for contributing to Apache Flink - we are happy that 
you want to help us improve Flink. To help the community review your 
contribution in the best possible way, please go through the checklist below, 
which will get the contribution into a shape in which it can be best reviewed.*
    *Please understand that we do not do this to make contributions to Flink a 
hassle. In order to uphold a high standard of quality for code contributions, 
while at the same time managing a large number of contributions, we need 
contributors to prepare the contributions well, and give reviewers enough 
contextual information for the review. Please also understand that 
contributions that do not follow this guide will take longer to review and thus 
typically be picked up with lower priority by the community.*
    ## Contribution Checklist
      - Make sure that the pull request corresponds to a [JIRA 
issue](https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/issues). Exceptions are 
made for typos in JavaDoc or documentation files, which need no JIRA issue.
      - Name the pull request in the form "[FLINK-1234] [component] Title of 
the pull request", where *FLINK-1234* should be replaced by the actual issue 
number. Skip *component* if you are unsure about which is the best component.
      Typo fixes that have no associated JIRA issue should be named following 
this pattern: `[hotfix] [docs] Fix typo in event time introduction` or 
`[hotfix] [javadocs] Expand JavaDoc for PuncuatedWatermarkGenerator`.
      - Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the 
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
      - Make sure that the change passes the automated tests, i.e., `mvn clean 
verify` passes. You can set up Travis CI to do that following [this 
      - Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from 
multiple issues.
      - Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message 
(including the JIRA id)
      - Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text 
and this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
    **(The sections below can be removed for hotfixes of typos)**
    ## What is the purpose of the change
    *(For example: This pull request makes task deployment go through the blob 
server, rather than through RPC. That way we avoid re-transferring them on each 
deployment (during recovery).)*
    ## Brief change log
    *(for example:)*
      - *The TaskInfo is stored in the blob store on job creation time as a 
persistent artifact*
      - *Deployments RPC transmits only the blob storage reference*
      - *TaskManagers retrieve the TaskInfo from the blob cache*
    ## Verifying this change
    *(Please pick either of the following options)*
    This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.
    This change is already covered by existing tests, such as *(please describe 
    This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
      - *Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads 
      - *Extended integration test for recovery after master (JobManager) 
      - *Added test that validates that TaskInfo is transferred only once 
across recoveries*
      - *Manually verified the change by running a 4 node cluser with 2 
JobManagers and 4 TaskManagers, a stateful streaming program, and killing one 
JobManager and two TaskManagers during the execution, verifying that recovery 
happens correctly.*
    ## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
      - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
      - The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with 
`@Public(Evolving)`: (yes / no)
      - The serializers: (yes / no / don't know)
      - The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes / no / 
don't know)
      - Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its 
components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / no / don't know)
    ## Documentation
      - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
      - If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / 
JavaDocs / not documented)

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/dawidwys/flink cep-processing-watermark

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:


To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #4514
commit 09406258a053c4ee6afa53cfde130f52d736749a
Author: Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org>
Date:   2017-08-10T14:00:30Z

    [FLINK-7384][cep] Unify event and processing time handling in the 


> Unify event and processing time handling in the 
> AbstractKeyedCEPPatternOperator.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: FLINK-7384
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7384
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: CEP
>            Reporter: Kostas Kloudas
>            Assignee: Dawid Wysakowicz
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.4.0
> With the recent changes introduced in 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7293, the code paths between 
> event- and processing-time handling are very close. This gives an opportunity 
> to unify the 2 paths.
> To do this when operating in processing time, the user will specify an 
> interval (like the watermark interval in event time), during which elements 
> will be buffered, and only when this interval expires, the elements will be 
> emitted. This is the same as the case of event-time, where elements between 
> watermarks are buffered.
> This change will remove the need to register a processing time timer for 
> every millisecond and it will also allow to emit timed-out patterns in 
> processing time without having to wait for the "next" element to arrive.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to