Apache Storm/JStorm Runner(s) for Apache Beam

Note: cross-posting to dev@beam and dev@storm I’ve seen at least two threads on the dev@ list discussing the JStorm runner and my hope is we can expand on that discussion and cross-pollinate with the Storm/JStorm/Beam communities as well. A while back I created a very preliminary proof of

Re: IO ITs: Hosting Docker images

Agree it's what I said in a previous email. Regards JB On Apr 10, 2017, 18:58, at 18:58, Ekrem Aksoy wrote: >Hi Stephen, > >Can we piggyback on current Apache Docker Hub account? I think images >can >be hold there, too. > >-E > >On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Stephen

Re: [DISCUSSION] PAssert success/failure count validation for all runners

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > @kenn What’s the design you’re mentioning? (I probably missed it because > I’m not completely up to data on the Jiras and ML because of Flink Forward > preparations) > There are three parts (I hope I say this in a

Re: Combine.Global

This looks like it might be because the output coder cannot be determined. It looks like the registry understands that it must build a KvCoder, but cannot infer the coder for OutputT. More specifically, within the stack trace, the following line occurs: "Unable to provide a default Coder for

Re: IO ITs: Hosting Docker images

Hi Stephen, Can we piggyback on current Apache Docker Hub account? I think images can be hold there, too. -E On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Stephen Sisk wrote: > for 4 - there's a number of logistics involved. How do you propose handling > cost, potential DOS, etc?

Re: IO ITs: Hosting Docker images

Can you expand a bit on why you'd like to do that vs the other options? One of the downsides of the "we create our own docker images" plan is that we have to maintain them. How do you want to do that? to be clear: I'm asking because I'm trying to figure out what the community wants and right

Jenkins build became unstable: beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #384

See

Re: IO ITs: Hosting Docker images

for 4 - there's a number of logistics involved. How do you propose handling cost, potential DOS, etc? People in different timezones would need to be oncall for it since it impacts people's ability to dev work (or they need to be okay if it goes out.) Can you give some reasons why you think it's

Re: [PROPOSAL]: a new feature branch for SQL DSL

i just want to know what the SQL State API equivalent is for SQL, since beam has already support stateful processing using state DoFn 2017-04-11 2:12 GMT+08:00 Tyler Akidau : > 陈竞, what are you specifically curious about regarding state? Are you > wanting to know what

Re: [DISCUSSION] PAssert success/failure count validation for all runners

I have the impression this conversation went into a different sub-discussion ignoring the core subject that is if it makes sense to do the implementation of Passert as we are doing it right now (1), or in a runner agnostic way (2). Big +1 for (2). And I think also this is critical enough to be