[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16547521#comment-16547521
 ] 

aitozi edited comment on FLINK-9883 at 7/18/18 8:08 AM:
--------------------------------------------------------

IMO, it can be used like this 

{code:java}
.keyBy()
.window(windowAssigner)
.filter(Window window, Context ctx)
.process(processWindowFunction)
{code}

and in windowOperator onEventtime or  onProcessingTime .eg, we should filter 
the window by the user specified function and then choose the corresponding 
windowState to deal with rather than trigger all the window (NS) in 
internalTimerService.



was (Author: aitozi):
IMO, it can be used like this 

{code:java}
.keyBy()
.window(windowAssigner)
.filter(Window window, Context ctx)
{code}

and in windowOperator onEventtime or  onProcessingTime .eg, we should filter 
the window by the user specified function and then choose the corresponding 
windowState to deal with rather than trigger all the window (NS) in 
internalTimerService.


> Filter the target window to calculate when deal with slidewindow
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-9883
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9883
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Streaming
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.1
>            Reporter: aitozi
>            Assignee: aitozi
>            Priority: Major
>
> When the SlideWindow deal with the ContinuousProcessingTimeTrigger or 
> ContinuousEventTimeTrigger will trigger all the related slide window to 
> process, but when user only care about the data like the recent 30 days, the 
> slidewindow's maxTimestamp which exceed today is not need to be process, so i 
> think we should add support to filter the slidewindow rather than ask user to 
> filter in the windowProcessFunction.  What's your idea [~aljoscha]



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to