Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Hi Behrouz, It makes sense then to change all of the examples then. This should pretty much be copy/paste once you have a default parameter parsing configuration. It is a bit tricky to debug what is happening inside the MiniYARNCluster. The logs are actually there (under target/) but they are

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

I think the primary concern was flink-examples but if you're on it, you can also modify the other examples. On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Behrouz Derakhshan wrote: > Hi, > > So my understanding was that the changes are only meant for flink-examples > package.

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Well the problem is that "YARNSessionFIFOITCase" is testing Yarn by running *word count* example using multiple jar files. So what happens is that, the test is calling this : Runner runner = startWithArgs(new String[]{"run", "-m", "yarn-cluster", "-yj", flinkUberjar.getAbsolutePath(),

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

I saw that the tool is missing Javadocs. I think that this is a prerequisite before moving it into all the examples (or at least both should happen hand in hand). I would like an example-centric style there. – Ufuk > On 04 Sep 2015, at 14:46, Behrouz Derakhshan

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

It would be nice to support both non-positional and positional arguments. Like in > posarg1 posarg2 --nonpos1 nonpos1value --nonpos2 nonpos2value The arguments should also be named but should be expected at a fixed position counting from the left ignoring non-positional arguments. For the time

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Hi Behrouz, I would create a new sub-task under the original issue that introduce the ParameterTool: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1525 Cheers, Max On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Behrouz Derakhshan wrote: > Hi Max, > > What you said makes sense,

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Will do. Thanks, Behrouz On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Maximilian Michels wrote: > Hi Behrouz, > > I would create a new sub-task under the original issue that introduce > the ParameterTool: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1525 > > Cheers, > Max > > On Fri, Sep

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

If you are referring to this training material ( https://github.com/dataArtisans/flink-training-exercises/blob/master/src/main/java/com/dataArtisans/flinkTraining/exercises/dataStreamJava/rideCleansing/RideCleansing.java), some of the examples are actually already using the ParameterTool. The

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Hi Max, What you said makes sense, for "ParameterTool doesn't seem to support positional arguments :) but we could fix that." should we create a separate ticket or should it also be part of FLINK-2021 ? BR, Behrouz On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Maximilian Michels wrote: >

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Yes, I was referring mostly to blog posts and other websites and was wondering if breaking them is an issue or not. I have already created a subtask to add support for positional arguments ( FLINK-2621 ), so the examples would be backward

Re: Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Hi Behrouz, Thanks for starting the discussion. If I understand your question correctly, you are asking if it breaks the training or other external material if we convert the Flink examples to make use of the ParameterTool? We could make the changes such that the examples will accept the same

Advice on [FLINK-2021]: Rework examples to use new ParameterTool

Hi, I had at look at this ticket FLINK-2021 , there isn't much to do from a technical stand point and it kinda makes sense to use the new "ParameterTool", since it is being used in most of the other part of the code base. The only question is do