Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

window with unbounded > > > preceding > > > >>>> rows. With the upcoming SQL proposal, queries that consume > unbounded > > > >> memory > > > >>>> should be identified and rejected. I would be in favor of allowing > &

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

to move the window definition > > >> into to > > >>>> groupBy clause for the Scala Table API. For the Java Table API we > > would > > >>>> need to extend the parser quite a bit because windows would need to > be > > >>>> defined as Strin

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

the over() clause is > >>>> optional and the same (and only) window is applied to all aggregates. > I > >>>> think we can make the over() call mandatory to have the windowing more > >>>> explicit. It should also be possible to extend the over clause to > &

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

gt; data and applies an aggregation to all rows of a group which is not >>>> happening here. In original SQL, the OVER clause features a PARTITION BY >>>> clause. We are moving this out of the window definition, i.e., OVER >> clause, >>>> to enfor

Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

d for flink stream SQL(FLINK-4546). In our opinion, batch and > stream > >>> are not necessarily to be differentiated at the SQL level. The major > >>> difference between batch and stream is "WHEN and HOW to emit the > result". > >>> We have been working o

Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

eam("Order", ds, 'userID, 'count, 'num) >> .map(f=>(f, 1L, 1L)) >> val sql = tblEnv.sql("SELECT Stream * FROM Order WHERE userID='A'") >> >> So in my opinion, the grammar which is marked red should be compatible >> with calcite's Strea

Re: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

月13日 18:17 收件人: dev@flink.apache.org 抄送: Sean Wang; Timo Walther 主题: Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations Hi Zhangrucong, yes, we want to use Calcite's SQL parser including its window syntax, i.e., - the standard SQL OVER windows (in streaming with a few r

re: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Wang; Timo Walther 主题: Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations Hi Zhangrucong, yes, we want to use Calcite's SQL parser including its window syntax, i.e., - the standard SQL OVER windows (in streaming with a few restriction such as no different partitionings or orders

Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

ot;) >> >> So in my opinion, the grammar which is marked red should be compatible >> with calcite's StreamSQL grammar. >> >> By the way, thanks very much for telling me the modified content in >> Flink StreamSQL. I will look the new proposal . >> >&

Re: 答复: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

which is marked red should be compatible > with calcite's StreamSQL grammar. > > By the way, thanks very much for telling me the modified content in Flink > StreamSQL. I will look the new proposal . > > Thanks! > 发件人: Sean Wang [mailto:wshaox...@gmail.com] > 发送时间: 2016年10月13日

Re: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

RTITION BY productId)) > > > > Thanks！ > > -----邮件原件- > 发件人: 王绍翾(大沙) [mailto:shaoxuan@alibaba-inc.com] > 发送时间: 2016年10月13日 2:03 > 收件人: dev@flink.apache.org > 主题: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations > > Hi Fabian, Timo, and Jark.Thanks for k

Re: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

shaoxuan@alibaba-inc.com] 发送时间: 2016年10月13日 2:03 收件人: dev@flink.apache.org 主题: RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations Hi Fabian, Timo, and Jark.Thanks for kicking off this FLIP. This is a really great and promising proposal. I have a few comments to the "window" operator prop

RE：[DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

---发件人：Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com>发送时间：2016年9月26日(星期一) 21:13收件人：dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org>主　题：Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations Hi everybody, Timo proposed our FLIP-11 a bit more than three weeks ago. I will update the s

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi everybody, Timo proposed our FLIP-11 a bit more than three weeks ago. I will update the status of the FLIP to accepted. Thanks, Fabian 2016-09-19 9:16 GMT+02:00 Timo Walther : > Hi Jark, > > yes I think enough time has passed. We can start implementing the changes. >

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi Jark, yes I think enough time has passed. We can start implementing the changes. What do you think Fabian? If there are no objections, I will create the subtasks in Jira today. For FLIP-11/1 I already have implemented a prototype, I just have to do some refactoring/documentation before

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi all, It seems that there’s no objections to the window design. So could we open subtasks to start working on it now ? - Jark Wu > 在 2016年9月7日，下午4:29，Jark Wu 写道： > > Hi Fabian, > > Thanks for sharing your ideas. > > They all make sense to me. Regarding to

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi Fabian, Thanks for sharing your ideas. They all make sense to me. Regarding to reassigning timestamp, I do not have an use case. I come up with this because DataStream has a TimestampAssigner :) +1 for this FLIP. - Jark Wu > 在 2016年9月7日，下午2:59，Fabian Hueske 写道： >

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi all, I'm on vacation for about five days , sorry to have missed this great FLIP. Yes, the non-windowed aggregates is a special case of row-window. And the proposal looks really good. Can we have a simplified form for the special case? Such as :

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi all, I thought about the API of the FLIP again. If we allow the "systemtime" attribute, we cannot implement a nice method chaining where the user can define a "allowLateness" only on event time. So even if the user expressed that "systemtime" is used we have to offer a "allowLateness"

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-11: Table API Stream Aggregations

Hi Jark, you had asked for non-windowed aggregates in the Table API a few times. FLIP-11 proposes row-window aggregates which are a generalization of running aggregates (SlideRow unboundedPreceding). Can you have a look at the FLIP and give feedback whether this is what you are looking for?