[DISCUSS] Service Authorization (redux)

Hello, now might be a good time to revisit an important enhancement to Flink security, so-called service authorization. This means the hardening of a Flink cluster against unauthorized use with some sort of authentication and authorization scheme. Today, Flink relies entirely on network

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink-shaded 1.0 (RC1)

Is there a pressing need to get the release out quickly? This being the first release, would it be better to change the versioning now to prevent future confusion? Even if Flink is the only intended consumer we’ll still be publishing the jars. > On Jul 23, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Stephan Ewen

Re: [flink-shaded] Some suggestions for improvements

For the SNAPSHOT part, I do not feel too strong about that either, just a tendency to keep it in sync with how core Flink works. For the "tools" directory, we can keep it as it is. It seems to complicated and really is not a big deal... On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Chesnay Schepler

Re: [flink-shaded] Some suggestions for improvements

I agree that the version scheme in the artifact isn't ideal. We can keep the tools out of the release, but not in a nice way. We either 1. remove it in a separate commit before each release 2. just omit it during the release process. 1) has the odd downside that the release branch cannot

Re: is flink' states functionality futile?

Ok, Let me see if I understand you correctly. You actually state that flink' states functionality is introduced only to handle recovering from failures. Let's take the example given in 1.3 documentary - https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.3/dev/stream/state.html

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-7246) Big latency shown on operator.latency

yinhua.dai created FLINK-7246: - Summary: Big latency shown on operator.latency Key: FLINK-7246 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7246 Project: Flink Issue Type: Bug

Re: [DISCUSS] Planning Release 1.4

I agree with these points. My personal take is that we tried to be a bit too strict with the "date to fork" and "date to release" and it got a bit in the way of development and testing. On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Robert Metzger wrote: > I agree that it was quite

[flink-shaded] Some suggestions for improvements

A few comments what we can improve in future releases: - I agree with Robert's comment to change the versioning to the same model as Flink where the master branch is on a SNAPSHOT version always and the releases are branches/tags with stable versions. - The version names of the artifacts

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flink-shaded 1.0 (RC1)

The release is technically correct, so +1 for the release - LICENSE and NOTICE are good - Shaded artifacts add their licenses to the artifact where needed - no binaries in the release I will send another mail with suggestions for improving things for future releases On Fri, Jul 21, 2017

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-7245) Enhance the operators to support holding back watermarks

Xingcan Cui created FLINK-7245: -- Summary: Enhance the operators to support holding back watermarks Key: FLINK-7245 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7245 Project: Flink Issue

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-7244) Add ParquetTableSource Implementation based on ParquetInputFormat

godfrey he created FLINK-7244: - Summary: Add ParquetTableSource Implementation based on ParquetInputFormat Key: FLINK-7244 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7244 Project: Flink

[jira] [Created] (FLINK-7243) Add ParquetInputFormat

godfrey he created FLINK-7243: - Summary: Add ParquetInputFormat Key: FLINK-7243 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7243 Project: Flink Issue Type: Sub-task Reporter: