Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-17 Thread Martin Neumann
I agree with Vasia that for data scientist it's likely easier to learn the high-level api. I like the material from http://dataartisans.github.io/flink-training/ but all of them focus on the high level api. Maybe we could have a guide (blog post, lecture, whatever) on how to get into Flink as a

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-16 Thread Wright, Eron
Jamie, I think you raise a valid concern but I would hesitate to accept the suggestion that the low-level API be promoted to app developers. Higher-level abstractions tend to be more constrained and more optimized, whereas lower-level abstractions tend to be more powerful, be more laborious to

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-16 Thread Vasiliki Kalavri
Hi Jamie, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this! You're raising some interesting points. Whether users find the lower-level primitives more intuitive depends on their background I believe. From what I've seen, if users are coming from the S4/Storm world and are used to the "compositional" way

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-15 Thread Jamie Grier
You lost me at lattice, Aljoscha ;) I do think something like the more powerful N-way FlatMap w/ Timers Aljoscha is describing here would probably solve most of the problem. Often Flink's higher level primitives work well for people and that's great. It's just that I also spend a fair amount of

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-15 Thread Till Rohrmann
Hi, I'm also not sure whether we should start teaching Flink by demonstrating the low-level APIs. According to my experience, people new to Flink should first learn a very basic set of primitive operations. Usually this is map, flatmap, join, windows, etc. The semantics of these operations is

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-15 Thread Aljoscha Krettek
Hi All, I also thought about this recently. A good think would be to add a good user facing operator that behaves more or less like an enhanced FlatMap with multiple inputs, multiple outputs, state access and keyed timers. I'm a bit hesitant, though, since users rarely think about the implications

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-15 Thread Matthias J. Sax
It really depends on the skill level of the developer. Using low-level API requires to think about many details (eg. state handling etc.) that could be done wrong. As Flink gets a broader community, more people will use it who might not have the required skill level to deal with low-level API.

Re: Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-14 Thread Gyula Fóra
Hi Jamie, I agree that it is often much easier to work on the lower level APIs if you know what you are doing. I think it would be nice to have very clean abstractions on that level so we could teach this to the users first but currently I thinm its not easy enough to be good starting point.

Some thoughts about the lower-level Flink APIs

2016-08-13 Thread Jamie Grier
Hey all, I've noticed a few times now when trying to help users implement particular things in the Flink API that it can be complicated to map what they know they are trying to do onto higher-level Flink concepts such as windowing or Connect/CoFlatMap/ValueState, etc. At some point it just