[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5654?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15947386#comment-15947386
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-5654:
---------------------------------------
Github user rtudoran commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3641#discussion_r108715233
--- Diff:
flink-libraries/flink-table/src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/table/plan/nodes/datastream/DataStreamOverAggregate.scala
---
@@ -274,6 +286,57 @@ class DataStreamOverAggregate(
}
result
}
+
+ def createTimeBoundedProcessingTimeOverWindow(inputDS: DataStream[Row]):
DataStream[Row] = {
+
+ val overWindow: Group = logicWindow.groups.get(0)
+ val partitionKeys: Array[Int] = overWindow.keys.toArray
+ val namedAggregates: Seq[CalcitePair[AggregateCall, String]] =
generateNamedAggregates
+
+ val index =
overWindow.lowerBound.getOffset.asInstanceOf[RexInputRef].getIndex
+ val count = input.getRowType.getFieldCount
+ val lowerBoundIndex = index - count
+
+
+ val timeBoundary =
logicWindow.constants.get(lowerBoundIndex).getValue2 match {
+ case bd: java.math.BigDecimal => bd.longValue()
+ case _ => throw new TableException("OVER Window boundaries must be
numeric")
+ }
+
+ // get the output types
+ val rowTypeInfo =
FlinkTypeFactory.toInternalRowTypeInfo(getRowType).asInstanceOf[RowTypeInfo]
+
+ val result: DataStream[Row] =
+ // partitioned aggregation
+ if (partitionKeys.nonEmpty) {
+
+ val processFunction =
AggregateUtil.createTimeBoundedProcessingOverProcessFunction(
+ namedAggregates,
+ inputType,
+ timeBoundary)
+
+ inputDS
+ .keyBy(partitionKeys: _*)
+ .process(processFunction)
+ .returns(rowTypeInfo)
+ .name(aggOpName)
+ .asInstanceOf[DataStream[Row]]
+ } else { // non-partitioned aggregation
+ val processFunction =
AggregateUtil.createTimeBoundedProcessingOverProcessFunction(
--- End diff --
@sunjincheng121 I disagree with this. Even if we move the creation of the
process function at the top of if (which is fine), we still need to make the
differentiation on what to use in the KeyBy - the actual field or a
NullSelector. Hence, as the if is needed i prefer to keep it as it is
> Add processing time OVER RANGE BETWEEN x PRECEDING aggregation to SQL
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-5654
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5654
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Table API & SQL
> Reporter: Fabian Hueske
> Assignee: radu
>
> The goal of this issue is to add support for OVER RANGE aggregations on
> processing time streams to the SQL interface.
> Queries similar to the following should be supported:
> {code}
> SELECT
> a,
> SUM(b) OVER (PARTITION BY c ORDER BY procTime() RANGE BETWEEN INTERVAL '1'
> HOUR PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW) AS sumB,
> MIN(b) OVER (PARTITION BY c ORDER BY procTime() RANGE BETWEEN INTERVAL '1'
> HOUR PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW) AS minB
> FROM myStream
> {code}
> The following restrictions should initially apply:
> - All OVER clauses in the same SELECT clause must be exactly the same.
> - The PARTITION BY clause is optional (no partitioning results in single
> threaded execution).
> - The ORDER BY clause may only have procTime() as parameter. procTime() is a
> parameterless scalar function that just indicates processing time mode.
> - UNBOUNDED PRECEDING is not supported (see FLINK-5657)
> - FOLLOWING is not supported.
> The restrictions will be resolved in follow up issues. If we find that some
> of the restrictions are trivial to address, we can add the functionality in
> this issue as well.
> This issue includes:
> - Design of the DataStream operator to compute OVER ROW aggregates
> - Translation from Calcite's RelNode representation (LogicalProject with
> RexOver expression).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
