[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8094?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16532839#comment-16532839
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-8094:
---------------------------------------
Github user HeartSaVioR commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6253
Seeking for some guides on this PR:
1. Maybe we could replace the implementation of ExistingField with the
implementation of IsoDateStringAwareExistingField since the implementation is
on top of ExistingField. Would we think replacing is better?
2. ExistingField has no test so I also don't add test for
IsoDateStringAwareExistingField: I guess adding test might require more
understanding of Table API. Would it be OK to skip adding test for
IsoDateStringAwareExistingField?
cc. @fhueske
> Support other types for ExistingField rowtime extractor
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-8094
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8094
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Table API & SQL
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0, 1.5.0
> Reporter: Xingcan Cui
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
>
> Currently, the {{ExistingField}} rowtime extractor only supports {{Long}} and
> {{Timestamp}} fields. To enable other data types (e.g., {{String}}), we can
> provide some system extraction functions and allow users to pass some
> parameters via the constructor of {{ExistingField}}. There's [a simple
> demo|https://github.com/xccui/flink/commit/afcc5f1a0ad92db08294199e61be5df72c1514f8]
> which enables the {{String}} type rowtime by adding a UDF {{str2EventTime}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
