[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3665?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15249930#comment-15249930
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-3665:
---------------------------------------
Github user dawidwys commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1848#issuecomment-212432502
Unfortunately I agree that it can be confusing but could not find an easier
way to properly test it.
I will fix the issue with the smaller equal -> smaller.
Just a quick question regarding the PR, shall I squash those commits or
leave them as it is?
> Range partitioning lacks support to define sort orders
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-3665
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3665
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: DataSet API
> Affects Versions: 1.0.0
> Reporter: Fabian Hueske
> Fix For: 1.1.0
>
>
> {{DataSet.partitionByRange()}} does not allow to specify the sort order of
> fields. This is fine if range partitioning is used to reduce skewed
> partitioning.
> However, it is not sufficient if range partitioning is used to sort a data
> set in parallel.
> Since {{DataSet.partitionByRange()}} is {{@Public}} API and cannot be easily
> changed, I propose to add a method {{withOrders(Order... orders)}} to
> {{PartitionOperator}}. The method should throw an exception if the
> partitioning method of {{PartitionOperator}} is not range partitioning.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
