AHeise commented on pull request #15771: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15771#issuecomment-845008815
> I tried addressing your comments. I am still not 100% sure about the short ACTIVE/IDLE cycle or should we rather let records be generated but halt watermarks forwarding. > > Do you mind taking another look @AHeise ? Looks already quite good. As discussed offline, I think that the ACTIVE/IDLE cycle is a good start and we should just optimize some operators to make them cycling in batches (asyncIO). To that end, could you try to factor out some small reusable pattern? I gave an idea on the respective lines. Other comments: * I have not yet giving up on making `PartialWatermark` private though ;) Please check and refute my idea. * I'd squash the squash commit. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
