[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-34427?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17284507#comment-17284507
]
Jungtaek Lim edited comment on SPARK-34427 at 2/15/21, 12:50 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
OK I agree it's going to meaningless argue. I should have raised the discussion
to dev@ mailing list.
(EDIT:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0802c6e8c5c4f51c0b781d137e6c62eb4e4105fbaea4d9743e8b6c51%40%3Cdev.spark.apache.org%3E)
Please don't get me wrong. My origin concern is that you're trying to preempt
major two efforts which would take non-trivial time for each one. There's no
prove that there's ongoing work internally - you should have created a design
doc or WIP PR if you made a meaningful progress internally, but you shared
nothing and just assigned both issues to you and said I'm working on both (or
planning to work on both) so don't step my toes. Sorry but that's not something
I can understand.
Again I'm not "just" concerned about this because it conflicts SPARK-10816. You
want it? I can give up SPARK-10816 if you want it, though I'd -1 if you don't
ensure having design doc, perf test, etc. to make the efforts on par. Just I
don't think you can take up multiple major efforts altogether even none of
things don't reach the PR (even WIP). I would have no argument if you just do
the thing one by one, leaving space for contributors to play with.
(Say I have no concern if you let RocksDB stuff be taken over from other
contributor to focus on this stuff. Vice versa.)
was (Author: kabhwan):
OK I agree it's going to meaningless argue. I should have raised the discussion
to dev@ mailing list.
(EDIT:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r0802c6e8c5c4f51c0b781d137e6c62eb4e4105fbaea4d9743e8b6c51%40%3Cdev.spark.apache.org%3E)
Please don't get me wrong. My origin concern is that you're trying to preempt
major two efforts which would take non-trivial time for each one. There's no
prove that there's ongoing work internally - you should have created a design
doc or WIP PR if you made a meaningful progress internally, but you shared
nothing and just assigned both issues to you and said I'm working on both.
Sorry but that's not something I can understand.
Again I'm not "just" concerned about this because it conflicts SPARK-10816. You
want it? I can give up SPARK-10816 if you want it, though I'd -1 if you don't
ensure having design doc, perf test, etc. to make the efforts on par. Just I
don't think you can take up multiple major efforts altogether even none of
things don't reach the PR (even WIP). I would have no argument if you just do
the thing one by one, leaving space for contributors to play with.
(Say I have no concern if you let RocksDB stuff be taken over from other
contributor to focus on this stuff. Vice versa.)
> Session window support in SS
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-34427
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-34427
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Structured Streaming
> Affects Versions: 3.2.0
> Reporter: L. C. Hsieh
> Priority: Major
>
> Currently structured streaming supports two kinds of windows: tumbling window
> and sliding window. Another useful window function is session window. Which
> is not supported by SS. We have user requirement to use session window. We'd
> like to have this support in the upstream.
> About session window, there is some info:
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/stream/operators/windows.html#session-windows.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
