AFAIK, the main purpose of having `run-application` was to make sure
the user is aware that application mode is used, which executes the main
method of the user program in JM rather than in client. This was important
at the time application mode was first introduced, but maybe not that
important
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 6:53 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> +1(binding)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Weijie
>
>
> Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> 于2024年5月15日周三 17:50写道：
>
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Rui
> >
> > On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 5:01 PM Xuannan Su
> wrote:
> >
> > >
Xintong Song created FLINK-35331:
Summary: Download links for binary releases are displayed as
source releases on website
Key: FLINK-35331
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-35331
Thanks for driving this effort, Xuannan.
+1 for the proposed changes.
Just one suggestion: Some of the proposed changes involve not solely
changing the configuration options, but are bound to changing / removal of
certain features. E.g., the removal of hash-blocking shuffle and legacy
hybrid
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 4:47 PM Zakelly Lan wrote:
> +1 binding
>
>
> Best,
> Zakelly
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 2:05 PM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Rui
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 1:02 PM Xuannan Su
> wrote:
> >
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 10:28 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1(binding)
>
> Best,
> Rui
>
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 10:13 PM Jing Ge
> wrote:
>
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Jing
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 1:28 PM Feifan Wang wrote:
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 11:04 AM Yunfeng Zhou
wrote:
> +1 (non-bindling)
>
> Best,
> Yunfeng
>
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 6:28 PM Yanfei Lei wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-425: Asynchronous Execution
> > Model [1].
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 12:51 PM Yuepeng Pan wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Yuepeng Pan
>
>
> On 2024/03/29 03:03:53 Yunfeng Zhou wrote:
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Yunfeng
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 6:23 PM Zakelly Lan
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
ll. I'm looking
> >> forward to getting more actively involved again.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Ufuk
> >>
> >> On Sun, Mar 24, 2024, at 11:27 AM, Ahmed Hamdy wrote:
> >>> +1 for the proposed timeline and release managers.
&g
+1 for the proposed timeline and Weijie & Rui as the release managers.
I think it would be welcomed if another 1-2 volunteers join as the release
managers, but that's not a must. We used to have only 1-2 release managers
for each release,
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 2:55 PM Jark Wu
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 8:30 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-433: State Access on
> DataStream API V2 [1]. The discussion thread is here [2].
>
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours unless there is an
keep minimal configurable items especially for the MVP. Given
> that we have the opportunity to refine the functionality before the
> framework transitions from @Experimental to @PublicEvolving, it makes sense
> to refrain from presenting user-facing options until we have ensured
> their ne
Sorry for joining the discussion late.
I have two questions about FLIP-425.
1. Regarding Record-ordered and State-ordered of processElement.
I understand that while State-ordered likely provides better performance,
Record-ordered is sometimes required for correctness. The question is how
should
Congratulations~!
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 7:02 PM Feng Jin wrote:
> Congratulations!
>
> Best,
> Feng
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 6:18 PM Yuepeng Pan wrote:
>
> > Congratulations!
> >
> >
> > Thanks to release managers and everyone involved.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
+1 (binding)
- verified signature and checksum
- verified that source distribution does not contain binaries
- built from source and played with example jobs, everything looks fine
- reviewed the release announcement PR
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 6:01 PM Lincoln Lee wrote:
> Hi
Personally, I'd be in favor of option 2. And based on the fact that
migrating from the deprecated CheckpointingMode to the new one takes barely
any effort (simply re-import the class), I'd be fine with removing the
deprecated class in 2.0.
But I'd also be fine with the other options.
Either way,
Matthias has already said it on the release sync, but I still want to say
it again. It's amazing how smooth the release testing goes for this
release. Great thanks to the release managers and all contributors who make
this happen.
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 10:10 AM Lincoln Lee
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:10 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-410: Config, Context and
> Processing Timer Service of DataStream API V2 [1]. The discussion
> thread is here [2].
>
>
> The vote will be open for at
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:09 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-409: DataStream V2 Building
> Blocks: DataStream, Partitioning and ProcessFunction [1]. The
> discussion thread is here [2].
>
>
> The vote will be
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:08 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-408: [Umbrella] Introduce
> DataStream API V2 [1]. The discussion thread is here [2].
>
>
> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours unless there
t; >
> > This is to facilitate possible future extensions. But I thought it
> > through, MetricGroup itself also plays the role of a manager.
> > So I think you are right, I will add a `getMetricGroup` method directly
> in
> > `RuntimeContext`.
> >
> > Best regard
also updated accordingly. It would be nice to also mention those changes in
> the FLIP-410 discussion thread.
>
> Yes, I've now mentioned those updates in the FLIP-410 discussion thread.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Weijie
>
>
> Xintong Song 于2024年2月5日周一 10:5
users, the benefit of removing them
> is to simplify Flink's code and reduce maintenance costs.
>
> If we just merge some user-related PRs recently, I could merge
> it after 1.19. Thank you again~
>
> Best,
> Rui
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 12:21 PM Xintong Song
> wr
Hi Rui,
Quick question, would there be any downside if this PR doesn't go into
1.19? Or any user benefit from getting it into this release?
Best,
Xintong
On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 10:16 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi release managers,
>
> > The feature freeze of 1.19 has started
FLIP has been updated.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Weijie
>
>
> Xintong Song 于2024年2月1日周四 11:31写道：
>
> > OK, I see your point.
> >
> > I think the demand for updating states and emitting outputs upon
> receiving
> > a broadcast record makes sense.
need to call this method, unless they explicitly want to
> > overwrite the timestamp.
> >
> > Make sense, I have updated this FLIP toward this new method name.
> >
> > > 2. While this method provides a way to set timestamps, how would users
> &g
>
> > How can users define custom metrics within the `ProcessFunction`?
> Will there be a method like `getMetricGroup` available in the
> `RuntimeContext`?
>
> I think this is a reasonable request. For extensibility, I have added the
> getMetricManager instead of getMetricGroup to RuntimeContext,
+1
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 11:41 AM Xuannan Su wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Thanks for all the feedback about the FLIP-331: Support
> EndOfStreamTrigger and isOutputOnlyAfterEndOfStream operator attribute
> to optimize task deployment [1] [2].
>
> I'd like to start a vote for it.
Just trying to understand.
> Is there a particular reason we do not support a
> `TwoInputProcessFunction` to combine a KeyedStream with a
> BroadcastStream to result in a KeyedStream? There seems to be a valid
> use case where a KeyedStream is enriched with a BroadcastStream and
> returns a
Thanks for working on this, Weijie.
The design flaws of the current DataStream API (i.e., V1) have been a pain
for a long time. It's great to see efforts going on trying to resolve them.
Significant changes to such an important and comprehensive set of public
APIs deserves caution. From that
Sorry, I just sent an incomplete email draft by mistake.
Thanks for reviving this, Xuannan. The updated FLIP LGTM. +1 for it.
Best,
Xintong
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 5:51 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> Thanks
>
> Best,
>
> Xintong
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 5:56 PM
w assigner
> in
> > a DataStream program, without bothering users to decide whether it is
> safe
> > to treat data in a bounded source as backlog data.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dong
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On M
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 3:31 PM Benchao Li wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Feng Wang 于2024年1月9日周二 15:29写道：
> >
> > +1 non-binding
> > Regards,
> > Feng
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 9, 2024 at 3:05 PM Leonard Xu wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > This is the official
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:48 PM Hang Ruan wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Hang
>
> Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> 于2024年1月8日周一 13:04写道：
>
> > +1(binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Rui
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:00 PM Xuannan Su wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> >
1405707256). It
> would be beneficial to offer a more intuitive and straightforward CLI
> command to enhance usability.
>
>
> Best,
> Zakelly
>
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 10:45 AM Xintong Song
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks a lot for offering the help, Rui. The plan s
@Deprecated in 1.19 (Must do in 1.19)
> - Refactor all usages of them to Java's Duration(Nice do in 1.19, must do
> in 1.20)
> - Remove them in 2.0
>
> Is this plan reasonable?
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14068
>
> Best,
> Rui
>
> On Wed, Jan
Congratulations~!
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:36 AM Leonard Xu wrote:
> Congrats, Alex!
>
> Best,
> Leonard
>
> > 2024年1月3日 上午4:11，Tang, Zhiyan (udx2na) 写道：
> >
> > big congrats to Alex and Happy New Year everyone!
> >
> > Best
> > Tony
> >
> > Get Outlook for
Hi devs,
The release managers have been tracking the progress of release 2.0 work
items. Unfortunately, some of the items are not in good progress, and
either don't have a contributor or the original contributor no longer has
capacity to work on them. We have already tried reaching out to some
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 2:54 PM Yong Fang wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> Thanks for all feedback about the FLIP-398: Improve Serialization
> Configuration And Usage In Flink [1] which has been discussed in [2].
>
> I'd like to start a vote for it. The vote will be open
n,
> T value)` as well.
+1
Best,
Xintong
On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 8:44 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> These features don't have a public option, but they work. I'm not sure
>> whether these features are used by some advanced users.
>> Actually, I think some of
gt; > > question why would we keep the discouraged interfaces at all. I would
> > > suggest the following:
> > > ```
> > > We encourage users and developers to always use ConfigOption for
> getting
> > /
> > > setting the configurations if possible, for it
Thanks for the efforts, Rui and Xuannan.
I think it's a good idea to migrate string-key configuration accesses to
ConfigOption-s in general.
I have a few suggestions / questions regarding the FLIP.
1. I think the default value for `TASK_MANAGER_LOG_PATH_KEY` should be "no
default". We can
lic class(or Api),
> is voting necessary?
>
> Best,
> Rui
>
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 at 16:55, Xintong Song wrote:
>
> > Sounds good to me.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Xintong
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 9:40 AM Xuannan Su
keep "String getString(String key, String defaultValue)" or not.
> > (It's not a right or wrong thing.)
> >
> > Judging from the discussion, most discussants can accept that keeping
> > `String getString(String key, String defaultValue)` and depreate the
> > rest of `ge
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 3:05 PM Lijie Wang wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Best,
> Lijie
>
> Yuxin Tan 于2023年12月15日周五 17:14写道：
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Best,
> > Yuxin
> >
> >
> > weijie guo 于2023年12月15日周五 10:05写道：
> >
> > > +1(binding)
> > >
> > > Best regards,
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 5:15 PM weijie guo
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Weijie
>
>
> Wencong Liu 于2023年12月15日周五 09:15写道：
>
> > Hi dev,
> >
> > I'd like to start a vote on FLIP-380.
> >
> > Discussion thread:
> >
Hi Ken,
I think the main purpose of this FLIP is to change how users interact with
the knobs for customizing the serialization behaviors, from requiring code
changes to working with pure configurations. Redesigning the knobs (i.e.,
names, semantics, etc.), on the other hand, is not the purpose of
configOption), and completely
> > > delete all getXxx(String key, String defaultValue) in 2.0.
> > > And I'm willing to pick it up~
> > >
> > > To Xintong:
> > >
> > > > I think a `toMap` as suggested by Zhu and Xuannan should solve the
> >
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 3:15 PM Lijie Wang wrote:
> Hi devs, Thanks for all feedback about the FLIP-383: Support Job Recovery
> for Batch Jobs[1]. This FLIP was discussed in [2].
>
> I'd like to start a vote for it. The vote will be open for at least 72
> hours
the
> > Configuration.
>
> Yeah, `toMap` can solve the problem, and I also mentioned it in the
> initial mail.
>
> Also Providing an iterator is fine, but we don't have a strong
> requirement for now. Simple is better, how about considering it
> if we have other strong
I'm leaning towards not allowing string-key based configuration access in
the long term.
I see the Configuration being used in two different ways:
1. Writing / reading a specific option. In such cases, ConfigOption has
many advantages compared to string-key, such as explicit value type,
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 10:05 AM Jiabao Sun
wrote:
> Thanks Matthias for this hard work!
>
> +1(non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Jiabao
>
>
> > 2023年12月14日 09:57，Leonard Xu 写道：
> >
> > +1(binding)
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Leonard
> >
> >> 2023年12月13日 下午10:59，Benchao Li 写道：
+1 (binding)
I guess I missed the FLIP discussion. But the FLIP LGTM. Thanks for driving
this, Matthias.
Best,
Xintong
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 8:33 PM Jing Ge wrote:
> +1(binding)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Jing
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 1:12 PM Zhu Zhu wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
>
Thanks for working on this, Yong.
The usability of the serialization mechanism has indeed been a pain for a
long time.
The proposed changes look good to me. +1 from my side.
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 10:36 AM Yong Fang wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> I'd like to start a discussion about
A big +1 for this proposal.
Thanks Leonard and the Flink CDC community. While there are many further
details to be discussed, I believe this proposal is aligned with the
long-term interests for both communities.
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 12:06 PM Samrat Deb wrote:
> That's
://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-194%3A+Introduce+the+JobResultStore
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 6:01 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> Thanks for addressing my comments, Lijie. LGTM
>
> Best,
>
> Xintong
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 2:56 PM Paul Lam wrote:
>
>> Hi
Thanks for addressing my comments, Lijie. LGTM
Best,
Xintong
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 2:56 PM Paul Lam wrote:
> Hi Lijie,
>
> Recovery for batch jobs is no doubt a long-awaited feature. Thanks for
> the proposal!
>
> I’m concerned about the multi-job scenario. In session mode, users could
>
Thanks for the proposal, Lijie and Zhu.
I have been having offline discussions with the Apache Celeborn folks
regarding integrating Apache Celeborn into Flink's Hybrid Shuffle mode. One
thing coming from those discussions that might relate to this FLIP is that
Celeborn maintains some internal
Thanks for the efforts, Matthias.
I think it would be helpful if we can at the end migrate the CI to an
ASF-managed Github Action, as long as it provides us a similar computation
capacity and stability. Given that the proposal is only to start a trial
and investigate whether the migration is
+1 (binding)
- verified checksum and signature
- verified license and notice file
- verified source archive does not contain any binary
- reviewed the release notes and web pr
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 4:21 PM Yuxin Tan wrote:
> Thanks weijie for driving the new release!
>
> +1
Thanks for kicking this off.
+1 for the proposed release managers (Lincoln, Yun, Jing and Martijn) and
targeting date (feature freeze: Jan 26).
I'd like to bring up that it is likely many efforts in the 1.19 release
cycle are also related to the 2.0 release. I think it would be better if
the
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 7:23 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On 13/10/2023 04:12, Junrui Lee wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thank you to everyone for the feedback on FLIP-366[1]: Support standard
> > YAML for FLINK configuration in the discussion thread
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 10:16 PM Yuepeng Pan wrote:
> +1(non-binding), thank you for driving this proposal.
>
> Best,
> Yuepeng Pan.
> At 2023-09-22 14:07:45, "Dong Lin" wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >We would like to start the vote for FLIP-327: Support switching from
Thanks for addressing my comments.
LGTM
Best,
Xintong
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 3:10 PM Dong Lin wrote:
> Hi Xintong,
>
> Thank you for all the comments. Please see my reply inline.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 11:31 AM Xintong Song
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks fo
more effort
when reworking this with the new API.
The rest of your replies make sense to me.
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 10:05 PM Dong Lin wrote:
> Hi Xintong,
>
> Thanks for your comments! Please see my reply inline.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 4:58 PM Xintong Son
Thanks for addressing my comments, Dong.
LGTM.
Best,
Xintong
On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 3:34 PM Wencong Liu wrote:
> Hi Dong & Jinhao,
>
> Thanks for your clarification! +1
>
> Best regards,
> Wencong
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 2023-09-15 11:26:16, "Dong Lin" wrote:
> >Hi
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 3:48 PM Jing Ge wrote:
> +1(binding)
>
> Best regards,
> Jing
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 7:31 AM Dong Lin wrote:
>
> > Thanks Wencong for the FLIP.
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 12:36 PM Wencong Liu
> wrote:
> >
>
Sorry to join the discussion late.
Overall, I think it's a good idea to support dynamically switching the
operator algorithms between Streaming (optimized towards low latency +
checkpointing supports) and Batch (optimized towards throughput). This is
indeed a big and complex topic, and I really
Thanks for preparing this FLIP, Dong & Jinhao.
I'm overall +1 to this proposal. This is helpful for some cases that we are
dealing with.
- Wencong and I are preparing guidelines for migrating from DataSet API to
DataStream API. We noticed that users have to define a custom trigger in
order to
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 2:40 AM Samrat Deb wrote:
> +1 ( non binding)
>
> These improved GC metrics will be a great addition.
>
> Bests,
> Samrat
>
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 at 7:58 PM, ConradJam wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> > gc metrics help with autoscale tuning
;
> Gyula
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:21 AM Xintong Song
> wrote:
>
> > Thank you :)
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Xintong
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:17 PM Gyula Fóra wrote:
> >
> > > Makes sense Xintong
Thank you :)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 4:17 PM Gyula Fóra wrote:
> Makes sense Xintong, I am happy to extend the proposal with the average gc
> time metric +1
>
> Gyula
>
> On Wed, Sep 6, 2023 at 10:09 AM Xintong Song
> wrote:
>
> > >
> > &
?
> > .TimePerGc or .AverageTime would make sense.
> > AverageTime may be a bit nicer :)
> >
> > My only concern is how useful this will be in reality. If there are only
> > (or several) long pauses then the msPerSec metrics will show it already,
> > and if there is a
Thanks for bringing this up, Gyula.
The proposed changes make sense to me. +1 for them.
In addition to the proposed changes, I wonder if we should also add
something like timePerGc? This would help understand whether there are long
pauses, due to GC STW, that may lead to rpc unresponsiveness and
+1
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 1:11 PM Dong Lin wrote:
> Thanks Wencong for initiating the discussion.
>
> +1 for the proposal.
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 12:00 PM Wencong Liu wrote:
>
> > Hi devs,
> >
> > I would like to start a discussion on FLIP-357: Deprecate Iteration API
>
Thanks for bringing this up, Matthias.
One thing that a user may achieve with an accumulator but not with a metric
group is to programmatically fetch the job execution result, rather than
outputting the results to an external sink, in attached mode. This can also
be achieved by using CollectSink,
As no concerns are raised, I'll update the wiki page.
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 5:31 PM Xintong Song wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> We have been evaluating the 3 TBD items from the Imperative API section of
> the release 2.0 work items [1].
> 1. Refactor the API module
Hi devs,
We have been evaluating the 3 TBD items from the Imperative API section of
the release 2.0 work items [1].
1. Refactor the API modules
2. Refactor context-like APIs
3. Convert user-facing concrete classes into interfaces.
*We propose to remove 1 & 3 from the list *(3 seems subsumed by
Thanks for driving this, Jark.
The current draft looks good to me. I think it is good to open a PR with
it. And if there are other comments, we can discuss them during the PR
review.
I also added a few minor comments in the draft regarding the feature radar.
Those can also be discussed on the
tus regardless.
>
> For the reasons above, I prefer introducing the configuration as is, and
> change it later with the a deprecation process or migration process. What
> do you think?
>
> Best,
> Xuannan
> On Aug 14, 2023, 14:09 +0800, Xintong Song , wrote:
> > Thanks
se let me know if you have further questions.
>
> Best,
> Xuannan
> On Aug 10, 2023, 20:23 +0800, Xintong Song , wrote:
> > Thanks for preparing the FLIP, Xuannan.
> >
> > +1 in general.
> >
> > A quick question, could you explain why we are relying on the wa
rformance for batch-only jobs in the long term.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best,
> Dong
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 9:16 PM Xintong Song
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Yunfeng,
> >
> > Thanks for preparing this FLIP. I'm respectful for the efforts you
> al
Hi Yunfeng,
Thanks for preparing this FLIP. I'm respectful for the efforts you already
put into the PoC implementation and benchmarks. However, I have to say I'm
quite concerned about this proposal.
1. The FLIP is based on the assumption that in non-timestamp scenarios
StreamRecord is the only
Thanks for preparing the FLIP, Xuannan.
+1 in general.
A quick question, could you explain why we are relying on the watermark for
emitting the record attribute? Why not use timestamps in the records? I
don't see any concern in using watermarks. Just wondering if there's any
deep considerations
Thanks for bringing this up, Shammon.
In general, I'd be +1 to improve Flink's ability to serve as an OLAP engine.
I see a great value in Flink becoming a unified Large-scale Data Processing
/ Analysis tool. Through my interactions with users (Alibaba internal
users, external users on Alibaba
Hi everyone,
On behalf of the PMC, I'm very happy to announce Weihua Hu as a new Flink
Committer!
Weihua has been consistently contributing to the project since May 2022. He
mainly works in Flink's distributed coordination areas. He is the main
contributor of FLIP-298 and many other improvements
Hi everyone,
On behalf of the PMC, I'm very happy to announce that Matthias Pohl has
joined the Flink PMC!
Matthias has been consistently contributing to the project since Sep 2020,
and became a committer in Dec 2021. He mainly works in Flink's distributed
coordination and high availability
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 3:05 AM Hong Liang wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks Deepthi!
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 7:44 PM Danny Cranmer
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Thanks Deepthi
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, 12:03 Rui Fan, <1996fan...@gmail.com>
Hi devs,
As the release 2.0 must-have items being voted and approved, the release
managers recently had another discussion on how to move forward. Here's the
summary.
## Follow-up of previous discussions
- As a follow-up of deciding the must-have items [1], Martijn will help
draft an
Hi devs,
I'm glad to announce that the must-have work items for release 2.0 [1] have
been approved. The voting thread is [2] and the discussions can be found in
[3][4].
There are 11 approving votes, 7 of which are binding:
- Xintong Song (binding)
- Yuan Mei (binding)
- Yu Li (binding)
- Leonard
Thanks all for participating. I'm closing this vote in another thread.
Best,
Xintong
On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 11:37 AM Jiabao Sun
wrote:
> + 1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks Xintong for driving this.
>
> Best,
> Jiabao
>
>
> On 2023/07/20 09:22:46 Xintong Song wrote:
&
t; released?
> > > > > > 2. How long are we going to support 1.x LTS? 1 year? 2 years? As
> > long
> > > > as
> > > > > > the issues that block users from migrating to 2.0 are not solved,
> > we
> > >
t; Jing
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 5:49 PM Matthias Pohl
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 10:11 AM Yuxin Tan
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Yuxin
> >
rest/messages/job/metrics/IOMetricsInfo.java
> > >
> > >
> >
> ./flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/rest/messages/JobVertexBackPressureInfo.java
> > >
> > >
> >
> ./flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/rest/message
gt;
> > > > >>
> > > > >> At 2023-07-21 18:05:26, "Jing Ge"
> > wrote:
> > > > >> >Hi Wencong,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Just out of curiosity, will the newly introduced
> > > > >> >deseriali
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 2:29 PM Wencong Liu wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
>
> I'd like to start a vote on FLIP-347.
>
>
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/3gcxhnqpsvb85golnlxf9tv5p43xkjgj
> FLIP:
>
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 2:26 PM Wencong Liu wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
>
> I'd like to start a vote on FLIP-344.
>
>
> Discussion thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/5lyjrrdtwkngkol2t541r4xwoh7133km
> FLIP:
>
+1 (binding)
Best,
Xintong
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 3:35 PM Yuepeng Pan wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks.
>
> Yuepeng Pan.
> At 2023-07-26 14:26:04, "Wencong Liu" wrote:
> >Hi dev,
> >
> >
> >I'd like to start a vote on FLIP-343.
> >
> >
> >Discussion thread:
>
lease cycle, considering FLIP-321 and 2.0 working
>> items are finalized quite nearing the feature freeze of 1.18?
>>
>> Best,
>> Qingsheng, Jing, Konstantin and Sergey
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 5:28 PM Xintong Song
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Good
ei wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Thanks for driving the discussion through and for all the efforts in
> > > resolving the complexities :-)
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Yuan
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 a
1 - 100 of 971 matches
Mail list logo
