Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi, Thanks all for your feedback. I created JIRA for bundling format jars in lib. [1] FYI. [1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-18173 Best, Jingsong Lee On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:59 PM Rui Li wrote: > +1 to add light-weighted formats into the lib > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:28 PM Leonard Xu wrote: > > > +1 for Jingsong’s proposal to put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro > > under lib/ directory. > > I have heard many SQL users(most of newbies) complaint the out-of-box > > experience in mail list. > > > > Best, > > Leonard Xu > > > > > > > 在 2020年6月5日,14:39,Benchao Li 写道: > > > > > > +1 to include them for sql-client by default; > > > +0 to put into lib and exposed to all kinds of jobs, including > > DataStream. > > > > > > Danny Chan 于2020年6月5日周五 下午2:31写道: > > > > > >> +1, at least, we should keep an out of the box SQL-CLI, it’s very poor > > >> experience to add such required format jars for SQL users. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Danny Chan > > >> 在 2020年6月5日 +0800 AM11:14,Jingsong Li ,写道: > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> > > >>> Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous > > >>> proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. > > >>> These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and > > >> they > > >>> are widely used by table users. > > >>> > > >>> Best, > > >>> Jingsong Lee > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > Thanks for your discussion. > > > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by > users' > > >> lack > > of format dependency. > > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third > > party > > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In > > >> total > > 151K... > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and > > >> "slim". > > But also improve usability. > > What do you think? Any objections? > > > > Best, > > Jingsong Lee > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler < > ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running > on > > > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by > > >> default. > > > > > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > >> @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the > > >> swift-fs > > > may > > >> be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > > >> > > >> I would still drop two more thoughts: > > >> > > >> (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > > > metrics > > >> reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't > > >> spoil > > > the > > >> class path any more. > > >> > > >> (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" > > >> docker > > >> file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > > >> possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be > > >> the > > >> default, though. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek < > > >> aljos...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can > > >> be nice > > >>> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The > > >> initial > > >>> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt > > >> and I > > >>> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and > > >> other > > >>> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client > > >> because > > >>> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having > > >> additional tools > > >>> would not solve anything because they would also not take that > > >> extra > > >>> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because > > >> the > > >>> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that > > >> we > > > want > > >>> to have. > > >>> > > >>> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the > > >> "fat"/"slim" idea > > >>> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > > >>> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > > >>> > > >>> 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > >>> 159K
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 to add light-weighted formats into the lib On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:28 PM Leonard Xu wrote: > +1 for Jingsong’s proposal to put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro > under lib/ directory. > I have heard many SQL users(most of newbies) complaint the out-of-box > experience in mail list. > > Best, > Leonard Xu > > > > 在 2020年6月5日,14:39,Benchao Li 写道: > > > > +1 to include them for sql-client by default; > > +0 to put into lib and exposed to all kinds of jobs, including > DataStream. > > > > Danny Chan 于2020年6月5日周五 下午2:31写道: > > > >> +1, at least, we should keep an out of the box SQL-CLI, it’s very poor > >> experience to add such required format jars for SQL users. > >> > >> Best, > >> Danny Chan > >> 在 2020年6月5日 +0800 AM11:14,Jingsong Li ,写道: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous > >>> proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. > >>> These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and > >> they > >>> are widely used by table users. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Jingsong Lee > >>> > >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li > >> wrote: > >>> > Thanks for your discussion. > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' > >> lack > of format dependency. > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third > party > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In > >> total > 151K... > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and > >> "slim". > But also improve usability. > What do you think? Any objections? > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler > wrote: > > > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by > >> default. > > > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > >> @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the > >> swift-fs > > may > >> be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > >> > >> I would still drop two more thoughts: > >> > >> (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > > metrics > >> reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't > >> spoil > > the > >> class path any more. > >> > >> (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" > >> docker > >> file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > >> possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be > >> the > >> default, though. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek < > >> aljos...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can > >> be nice > >>> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The > >> initial > >>> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt > >> and I > >>> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and > >> other > >>> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client > >> because > >>> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having > >> additional tools > >>> would not solve anything because they would also not take that > >> extra > >>> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because > >> the > >>> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that > >> we > > want > >>> to have. > >>> > >>> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the > >> "fat"/"slim" idea > >>> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > >>> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > >>> > >>> 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > >>> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > >>> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > >>> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > >>> 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > >>> 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > >>> 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > >>> 196K
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 for Jingsong’s proposal to put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib/ directory. I have heard many SQL users(most of newbies) complaint the out-of-box experience in mail list. Best, Leonard Xu > 在 2020年6月5日,14:39,Benchao Li 写道: > > +1 to include them for sql-client by default; > +0 to put into lib and exposed to all kinds of jobs, including DataStream. > > Danny Chan 于2020年6月5日周五 下午2:31写道: > >> +1, at least, we should keep an out of the box SQL-CLI, it’s very poor >> experience to add such required format jars for SQL users. >> >> Best, >> Danny Chan >> 在 2020年6月5日 +0800 AM11:14,Jingsong Li ,写道: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous >>> proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. >>> These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and >> they >>> are widely used by table users. >>> >>> Best, >>> Jingsong Lee >>> >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li >> wrote: >>> Thanks for your discussion. Sorry to start discussing another thing: The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' >> lack of format dependency. As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and they are widely used by table users. Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In >> total 151K... 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and >> "slim". But also improve usability. What do you think? Any objections? Best, Jingsong Lee On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by >> default. > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: >> @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the >> swift-fs > may >> be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. >> >> I would still drop two more thoughts: >> >> (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > metrics >> reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't >> spoil > the >> class path any more. >> >> (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" >> docker >> file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as >> possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be >> the >> default, though. >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek < >> aljos...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can >> be nice >>> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The >> initial >>> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt >> and I >>> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and >> other >>> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client >> because >>> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having >> additional tools >>> would not solve anything because they would also not take that >> extra >>> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because >> the >>> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that >> we > want >>> to have. >>> >>> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the >> "fat"/"slim" idea >>> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As >>> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: >>> >>> 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar >>> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar >>> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar >>> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar >>> 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar >>> 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar >>> 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar >>> 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar >>> 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar >>> 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> 160M opt >>> >>> The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. >>> >>> I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what >> I got: >>> >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 to include them for sql-client by default; +0 to put into lib and exposed to all kinds of jobs, including DataStream. Danny Chan 于2020年6月5日周五 下午2:31写道: > +1, at least, we should keep an out of the box SQL-CLI, it’s very poor > experience to add such required format jars for SQL users. > > Best, > Danny Chan > 在 2020年6月5日 +0800 AM11:14,Jingsong Li ,写道: > > Hi all, > > > > Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous > > proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. > > These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and > they > > are widely used by table users. > > > > Best, > > Jingsong Lee > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for your discussion. > > > > > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > > > > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' > lack > > > of format dependency. > > > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party > > > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > > > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In > total > > > 151K... > > > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > > > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and > "slim". > > > But also improve usability. > > > What do you think? Any objections? > > > > > > Best, > > > Jingsong Lee > > > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler > > > wrote: > > > > > > > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > > > > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by > default. > > > > > > > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > > > > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the > swift-fs > > > > may > > > > > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > > > > > > > > > > I would still drop two more thoughts: > > > > > > > > > > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > > > > metrics > > > > > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't > spoil > > > > the > > > > > class path any more. > > > > > > > > > > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" > docker > > > > > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > > > > > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be > the > > > > > default, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek < > aljos...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can > be nice > > > > > > but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The > initial > > > > > > observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt > and I > > > > > > talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and > other > > > > > > support channels have problems when first using the SQL client > because > > > > > > of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having > additional tools > > > > > > would not solve anything because they would also not take that > extra > > > > > > step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because > the > > > > > > annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that > we > > > > want > > > > > > to have. > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the > "fat"/"slim" idea > > > > > > and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > > > > > > mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > > > > > > > > > > > > 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > > > > > > 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 160M opt > > > > > > > > > > > > The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > > > > > > > > > > > > I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what > I got: > > > > > > > > > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > > > > > 36K
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1, at least, we should keep an out of the box SQL-CLI, it’s very poor experience to add such required format jars for SQL users. Best, Danny Chan 在 2020年6月5日 +0800 AM11:14,Jingsong Li ,写道: > Hi all, > > Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous > proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. > These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and they > are widely used by table users. > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li wrote: > > > Thanks for your discussion. > > > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' lack > > of format dependency. > > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party > > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In total > > 151K... > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and "slim". > > But also improve usability. > > What do you think? Any objections? > > > > Best, > > Jingsong Lee > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler > > wrote: > > > > > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > > > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by default. > > > > > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > > > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs > > > may > > > > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > > > > > > > > I would still drop two more thoughts: > > > > > > > > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > > > metrics > > > > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil > > > the > > > > class path any more. > > > > > > > > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker > > > > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > > > > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the > > > > default, though. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice > > > > > but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial > > > > > observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I > > > > > talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other > > > > > support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because > > > > > of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional > > > > > tools > > > > > would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra > > > > > step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the > > > > > annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we > > > want > > > > > to have. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea > > > > > and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > > > > > mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > > > > > > > > > > 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > > > > > 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 160M opt > > > > > > > > > > The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > > > > > > > > > > I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I > > > > > got: > > > > > > > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > > > > 24M sql-connectors-formats > > > > > > > > > > We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it > > > > > up > > > > > by much. We could
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 to add these 3 formast into dist, under the lib/ directory. This is a worth trying step toward better usability for SQL users. They don't have *any* dependencies and very small, so I think it's safe to add them. Best, Jark On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 at 11:14, Jingsong Li wrote: > Hi all, > > Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous > proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. > These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and they > are widely used by table users. > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li > wrote: > > > Thanks for your discussion. > > > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' > lack > > of format dependency. > > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party > > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In total > > 151K... > > > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and > "slim". > > But also improve usability. > > What do you think? Any objections? > > > > Best, > > Jingsong Lee > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler > > wrote: > > > >> One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > >> YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by > default. > >> > >> On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > >> > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the > swift-fs > >> may > >> > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > >> > > >> > I would still drop two more thoughts: > >> > > >> > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a > >> metrics > >> > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil > >> the > >> > class path any more. > >> > > >> > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" > docker > >> > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > >> > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the > >> > default, though. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek < > aljos...@apache.org> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be > nice > >> >> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The > initial > >> >> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I > >> >> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other > >> >> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client > because > >> >> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional > tools > >> >> would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra > >> >> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the > >> >> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we > >> want > >> >> to have. > >> >> > >> >> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" > idea > >> >> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > >> >> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > >> >> > >> >>17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> >>52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > >> >>10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > >> >>12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > >> >>36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> >>28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> >>31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > >> >> 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 160M opt > >> >> > >> >> The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > >> >> > >> >> I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I > got: > >> >> > >> >>73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > >> >>36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > >> >>55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > >> >>20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >> 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> >>24M sql-connectors-formats > >> >> > >> >> We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it >
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi all, Considering that 1.11 will be released soon, what about my previous proposal? Put flink-csv, flink-json and flink-avro under lib. These three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and they are widely used by table users. Best, Jingsong Lee On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:19 PM Jingsong Li wrote: > Thanks for your discussion. > > Sorry to start discussing another thing: > > The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' lack > of format dependency. > As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party > dependence, and they are widely used by table users. > Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In total > 151K... > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? > It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and "slim". > But also improve usability. > What do you think? Any objections? > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler > wrote: > >> One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on >> YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by default. >> >> On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: >> > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs >> may >> > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. >> > >> > I would still drop two more thoughts: >> > >> > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a >> metrics >> > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil >> the >> > class path any more. >> > >> > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker >> > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as >> > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the >> > default, though. >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek >> > wrote: >> > >> >> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice >> >> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial >> >> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I >> >> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other >> >> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because >> >> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools >> >> would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra >> >> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the >> >> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we >> want >> >> to have. >> >> >> >> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea >> >> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As >> >> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: >> >> >> >>17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >> >>52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar >> >> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar >> >> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar >> >> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar >> >>10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar >> >>12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar >> >>36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >> >>28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >> >>31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar >> >> 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar >> >> 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >> >> 160M opt >> >> >> >> The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. >> >> >> >> I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: >> >> >> >>73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar >> >>36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar >> >>55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar >> >>20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >> 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar >> >>24M sql-connectors-formats >> >> >> >> We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up >> >> by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from >> >> opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink >> >> dist. So maybe we should do that instead? >> >> >> >> We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up >> >> the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them >> to >> >> lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, >> >> which is also not in lib/. >> >> >> >> What do you think? >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> Aljoscha >> >> >> >>
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Thanks for your discussion. Sorry to start discussing another thing: The biggest problem I see is the variety of problems caused by users' lack of format dependency. As Aljoscha said, these three formats are very small and no third party dependence, and they are widely used by table users. Actually, we don't have any other built-in table formats now... In total 151K... 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar So, Can we just put them into "lib/" or flink-table-uber? It not solve all problems and maybe it is independent of "fat" and "slim". But also improve usability. What do you think? Any objections? Best, Jingsong Lee On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:48 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: > One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on > YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by default. > > On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs > may > > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > > > > I would still drop two more thoughts: > > > > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics > > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the > > class path any more. > > > > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker > > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the > > default, though. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > > >> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice > >> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial > >> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I > >> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other > >> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because > >> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools > >> would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra > >> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the > >> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want > >> to have. > >> > >> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea > >> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > >> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > >> > >>17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > >> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > >> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > >> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > >>10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > >>12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > >>36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > >> 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > >> 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> 160M opt > >> > >> The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > >> > >> I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: > >> > >>73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > >>36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > >>55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > >>20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>24M sql-connectors-formats > >> > >> We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up > >> by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from > >> opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink > >> dist. So maybe we should do that instead? > >> > >> We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up > >> the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to > >> lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, > >> which is also not in lib/. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Best, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the > >>> https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. > >>> All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this > >> step > >>> can't be omitted anyway). > >>> We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default > >>> selects some popular connectors. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Jark > >>> > >>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2020
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
One downside would be that we're shipping more stuff when running on YARN for example, since the entire plugins directory is shiped by default. On 17/04/2020 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs may be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. I would still drop two more thoughts: (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the class path any more. (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the default, though. On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want to have. Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As mentioned we have these jars in opt/: 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 160M opt The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar 24M sql-connectors-formats We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink dist. So maybe we should do that instead? We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, which is also not in lib/. What do you think? Best, Aljoscha On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: Hi, I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step can't be omitted anyway). We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default selects some popular connectors. Best, Jark On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at https://code.quarkus.io/ You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. Rafi On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and you're right that only hides the problem for some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? Would't that be good enough for us to try? Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a dozen times and I won't see such questions coming up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every day. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall into these particular use-cases. Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it from the start and
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Great discussion! I'm also in favor of a single distribution that is optimized for the initial user experience. Most advanced users understand how to customize a distribution and many are probably already building their own. A forcing function for custom builds is the need to patch the official releases. For those users, extensibility and quality of tooling and build process are likely more important than the dist archive that we publish. Thanks, Thomas On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:21 AM Benchao Li wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks Aljoscha for bringing this discussion, and thanks all for the > wonderful discussion. > In general, I think improving the user experience is a good idea, and it > seems that we > all agree on that. > > Regarding how to achieve this, > I think Aljoscha has brought a good solution, which we have already did > internally. > Instead of releasing and maintaining two versions, "fat" and "slim", we > achieved this > by introducing other directories named "connectors" and "formats". And then > we > modified sql-client to add these directories to it's classpath by default. > By doing this, we can release just one version, and achieves two goals: > 1. improve out-of-box user experience for sql users (sql-client) > 2. do not spoils the classpath for normal users including DataStream and > Table API > There is one flaw, this will makes the bundle of release bigger than > before, which maybe > a not-good experience for downloading. > > Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年5月5日周二 下午6:42写道: > > > For SQL we could leave them in opt/. The SQL client shell script already > > does discovery for some jars in opt, for example the main SQL client jar > > is not in lib but it's loaded from opt/. We could do the same for the > > connector/format jars. > > > > @Timo or @Jark could you confirm whether this would work? > > > > Best, > > Aljoscha > > > > On 05.05.20 10:58, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > > Are you suggesting to add the SQL dependencies to opt/ or lib/? > > > > > > I thought the argument against opt/ was that it would not be much > > different > > > from downloading the additional dependencies. > > > > > > Moving it to lib/ would justify in my opinion a separate release > because > > of > > > potential dependency conflicts for users who don't want to use SQL. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Till > > > > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aljoscha Krettek > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Thanks Till for summarizing! > > >> > > >> Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove > one > > >> of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL > > >> connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the > > >> same, or a bit smaller. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Aljoscha > > >> > > >> On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > >>> Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. > > >>> > > >>> Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then > > >> let's > > >>> see how we can move it forward. > > >>> > > >>> To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve > Flink's > > >> user > > >>> experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first > > >> time > > >>> users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. > > >>> > > >>> The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that > > the > > >>> current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth > > >> first > > >>> time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production > > >> setup. > > >>> Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink > > distribution > > >>> addressing these two differing needs. > > >>> > > >>> As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion > > points. > > >>> > > >>> 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? > > >>> > > >>> a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the > > Flink > > >>> web site. > > >>> b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web > site > > >> and > > >>> have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a > fat > > >>> distribution by downloading additional dependencies. > > >>> > > >>> For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to > > execute > > >>> an additional step. The downside is that we will add another > dimension > > to > > >>> the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see > > >> Chesnay's > > >>> last comment for more details). > > >>> > > >>> For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we > > can > > >>> provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing > a > > >>> connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The > > >>> downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a > > tool > > >>> (which in itself could be quite complex). > > >>> > > >>> 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? > > >>> > > >>> The current proposal is to move
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi all, Thanks Aljoscha for bringing this discussion, and thanks all for the wonderful discussion. In general, I think improving the user experience is a good idea, and it seems that we all agree on that. Regarding how to achieve this, I think Aljoscha has brought a good solution, which we have already did internally. Instead of releasing and maintaining two versions, "fat" and "slim", we achieved this by introducing other directories named "connectors" and "formats". And then we modified sql-client to add these directories to it's classpath by default. By doing this, we can release just one version, and achieves two goals: 1. improve out-of-box user experience for sql users (sql-client) 2. do not spoils the classpath for normal users including DataStream and Table API There is one flaw, this will makes the bundle of release bigger than before, which maybe a not-good experience for downloading. Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年5月5日周二 下午6:42写道: > For SQL we could leave them in opt/. The SQL client shell script already > does discovery for some jars in opt, for example the main SQL client jar > is not in lib but it's loaded from opt/. We could do the same for the > connector/format jars. > > @Timo or @Jark could you confirm whether this would work? > > Best, > Aljoscha > > On 05.05.20 10:58, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > Are you suggesting to add the SQL dependencies to opt/ or lib/? > > > > I thought the argument against opt/ was that it would not be much > different > > from downloading the additional dependencies. > > > > Moving it to lib/ would justify in my opinion a separate release because > of > > potential dependency conflicts for users who don't want to use SQL. > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > > >> Thanks Till for summarizing! > >> > >> Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove one > >> of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL > >> connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the > >> same, or a bit smaller. > >> > >> Best, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: > >>> Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. > >>> > >>> Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then > >> let's > >>> see how we can move it forward. > >>> > >>> To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's > >> user > >>> experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first > >> time > >>> users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. > >>> > >>> The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that > the > >>> current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth > >> first > >>> time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production > >> setup. > >>> Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink > distribution > >>> addressing these two differing needs. > >>> > >>> As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion > points. > >>> > >>> 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? > >>> > >>> a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the > Flink > >>> web site. > >>> b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site > >> and > >>> have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat > >>> distribution by downloading additional dependencies. > >>> > >>> For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to > execute > >>> an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension > to > >>> the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see > >> Chesnay's > >>> last comment for more details). > >>> > >>> For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we > can > >>> provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a > >>> connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The > >>> downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a > tool > >>> (which in itself could be quite complex). > >>> > >>> 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? > >>> > >>> The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt > to > >>> the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and > >>> filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these > >>> implementations without running into dependency conflicts. > >>> > >>> For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: > >>> > >>> flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-json-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> sql-connectors-formats > >>> > >>> How to move forward from here? > >>> > >>> Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would > actually > >>> propose to follow
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
SQL client is one of the user cases. There are also use cases like submitting SQL job to a cluster and then meet the missing connector or format jars error. And in that case, it's actually more difficult for users to understand and fix. For example, user submits a SQL job to a running cluster with SQL client. After the error and some investigation, they then download and put the jars to lib/ directory and restart the SQL client. But if they don't realize the cluster should also be restarted, the same error would happen again and it's really confusing them because they seem already follow the instructions to fix the problem. Best, Kurt On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 6:42 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > For SQL we could leave them in opt/. The SQL client shell script already > does discovery for some jars in opt, for example the main SQL client jar > is not in lib but it's loaded from opt/. We could do the same for the > connector/format jars. > > @Timo or @Jark could you confirm whether this would work? > > Best, > Aljoscha > > On 05.05.20 10:58, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > Are you suggesting to add the SQL dependencies to opt/ or lib/? > > > > I thought the argument against opt/ was that it would not be much > different > > from downloading the additional dependencies. > > > > Moving it to lib/ would justify in my opinion a separate release because > of > > potential dependency conflicts for users who don't want to use SQL. > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > > >> Thanks Till for summarizing! > >> > >> Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove one > >> of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL > >> connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the > >> same, or a bit smaller. > >> > >> Best, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: > >>> Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. > >>> > >>> Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then > >> let's > >>> see how we can move it forward. > >>> > >>> To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's > >> user > >>> experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first > >> time > >>> users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. > >>> > >>> The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that > the > >>> current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth > >> first > >>> time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production > >> setup. > >>> Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink > distribution > >>> addressing these two differing needs. > >>> > >>> As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion > points. > >>> > >>> 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? > >>> > >>> a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the > Flink > >>> web site. > >>> b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site > >> and > >>> have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat > >>> distribution by downloading additional dependencies. > >>> > >>> For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to > execute > >>> an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension > to > >>> the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see > >> Chesnay's > >>> last comment for more details). > >>> > >>> For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we > can > >>> provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a > >>> connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The > >>> downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a > tool > >>> (which in itself could be quite complex). > >>> > >>> 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? > >>> > >>> The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt > to > >>> the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and > >>> filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these > >>> implementations without running into dependency conflicts. > >>> > >>> For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: > >>> > >>> flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-json-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>> sql-connectors-formats > >>> > >>> How to move forward from here? > >>> > >>> Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would > actually > >>> propose to follow the simplest approach which is the creation of two > >>> distributions ("fat" & "slim"). We can still rethink this decision at a > >>> later point and introduce a tool which allows to download a custom > build > >>> Flink distribution. At this point
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
For SQL we could leave them in opt/. The SQL client shell script already does discovery for some jars in opt, for example the main SQL client jar is not in lib but it's loaded from opt/. We could do the same for the connector/format jars. @Timo or @Jark could you confirm whether this would work? Best, Aljoscha On 05.05.20 10:58, Till Rohrmann wrote: Are you suggesting to add the SQL dependencies to opt/ or lib/? I thought the argument against opt/ was that it would not be much different from downloading the additional dependencies. Moving it to lib/ would justify in my opinion a separate release because of potential dependency conflicts for users who don't want to use SQL. Cheers, Till On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Thanks Till for summarizing! Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove one of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the same, or a bit smaller. Best, Aljoscha On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then let's see how we can move it forward. To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's user experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first time users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that the current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth first time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production setup. Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink distribution addressing these two differing needs. As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion points. 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site. b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site and have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat distribution by downloading additional dependencies. For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to execute an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension to the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see Chesnay's last comment for more details). For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we can provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a tool (which in itself could be quite complex). 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt to the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these implementations without running into dependency conflicts. For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: flink-avro-1.10.0.jar flink-csv-1.10.0.jar flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-json-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar sql-connectors-formats How to move forward from here? Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would actually propose to follow the simplest approach which is the creation of two distributions ("fat" & "slim"). We can still rethink this decision at a later point and introduce a tool which allows to download a custom build Flink distribution. At this point we could then remove the "fat" jar from the web site. Of course, this comes at the cost of increased release complexity but I believe that the user experience will make up for it. For the what to include, I think we could take Aljoscha's proposal and then see what other dependencies the most common SQL use cases require. I guess that the SQL guys know quite precisely where the users run into problems. I know that this solution might not be perfect (in particular wrt releases) but I hope that everyone could live with this solution for the time being. Feel free to add anything I might have forgotten to mention here. Cheers, Till On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:43 AM Chesnay Schepler wrote: It would be good if we could nail down what a slim/fat distribution would look like, as there are various ideas floating around in this thread. Like, what is a "slim" distribution? Are we just emptying /opt? Removing everything larger than 1mb? Are we throwing out the Table API from /lib for a minimal streaming distribution? Are we going ham and remove the YARN integration from the flink-dist jar? While I can see how a fat distribution can certainly help for the out-of-the-box experience, I'm not so
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Are you suggesting to add the SQL dependencies to opt/ or lib/? I thought the argument against opt/ was that it would not be much different from downloading the additional dependencies. Moving it to lib/ would justify in my opinion a separate release because of potential dependency conflicts for users who don't want to use SQL. Cheers, Till On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:01 AM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > Thanks Till for summarizing! > > Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove one > of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL > connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the > same, or a bit smaller. > > Best, > Aljoscha > > On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: > > Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. > > > > Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then > let's > > see how we can move it forward. > > > > To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's > user > > experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first > time > > users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. > > > > The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that the > > current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth > first > > time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production > setup. > > Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink distribution > > addressing these two differing needs. > > > > As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion points. > > > > 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? > > > > a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink > > web site. > > b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site > and > > have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat > > distribution by downloading additional dependencies. > > > > For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to execute > > an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension to > > the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see > Chesnay's > > last comment for more details). > > > > For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we can > > provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a > > connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The > > downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a tool > > (which in itself could be quite complex). > > > > 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? > > > > The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt to > > the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and > > filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these > > implementations without running into dependency conflicts. > > > > For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: > > > > flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > > flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > > flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > flink-json-1.10.0.jar > > flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > > sql-connectors-formats > > > > How to move forward from here? > > > > Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would actually > > propose to follow the simplest approach which is the creation of two > > distributions ("fat" & "slim"). We can still rethink this decision at a > > later point and introduce a tool which allows to download a custom build > > Flink distribution. At this point we could then remove the "fat" jar from > > the web site. Of course, this comes at the cost of increased release > > complexity but I believe that the user experience will make up for it. > > > > For the what to include, I think we could take Aljoscha's proposal and > then > > see what other dependencies the most common SQL use cases require. I > guess > > that the SQL guys know quite precisely where the users run into problems. > > > > I know that this solution might not be perfect (in particular wrt > releases) > > but I hope that everyone could live with this solution for the time > being. > > > > Feel free to add anything I might have forgotten to mention here. > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:43 AM Chesnay Schepler > > wrote: > > > >> It would be good if we could nail down what a slim/fat distribution > >> would look like, as there are various ideas floating around in this > thread. > >> > >> Like, what is a "slim" distribution? Are we just emptying /opt? Removing > >> everything larger than 1mb? Are we throwing out the Table API from /lib > >> for a minimal streaming distribution? > >> Are we going ham and remove the YARN integration from the flink-dist > jar? > >> > >> While I can see how a fat distribution can certainly help for the > >> out-of-the-box experience, I'm not so
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Thanks Till for summarizing! Another alternative is also to stick to one distribution but remove one of the very heavy filesystem connectors and add all the mentioned SQL connectors/formats, which will keep the size of the distribution the same, or a bit smaller. Best, Aljoscha On 04.05.20 18:59, Till Rohrmann wrote: Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then let's see how we can move it forward. To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's user experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first time users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that the current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth first time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production setup. Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink distribution addressing these two differing needs. As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion points. 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site. b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site and have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat distribution by downloading additional dependencies. For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to execute an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension to the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see Chesnay's last comment for more details). For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we can provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a tool (which in itself could be quite complex). 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt to the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these implementations without running into dependency conflicts. For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: flink-avro-1.10.0.jar flink-csv-1.10.0.jar flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-json-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar sql-connectors-formats How to move forward from here? Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would actually propose to follow the simplest approach which is the creation of two distributions ("fat" & "slim"). We can still rethink this decision at a later point and introduce a tool which allows to download a custom build Flink distribution. At this point we could then remove the "fat" jar from the web site. Of course, this comes at the cost of increased release complexity but I believe that the user experience will make up for it. For the what to include, I think we could take Aljoscha's proposal and then see what other dependencies the most common SQL use cases require. I guess that the SQL guys know quite precisely where the users run into problems. I know that this solution might not be perfect (in particular wrt releases) but I hope that everyone could live with this solution for the time being. Feel free to add anything I might have forgotten to mention here. Cheers, Till On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:43 AM Chesnay Schepler wrote: It would be good if we could nail down what a slim/fat distribution would look like, as there are various ideas floating around in this thread. Like, what is a "slim" distribution? Are we just emptying /opt? Removing everything larger than 1mb? Are we throwing out the Table API from /lib for a minimal streaming distribution? Are we going ham and remove the YARN integration from the flink-dist jar? While I can see how a fat distribution can certainly help for the out-of-the-box experience, I'm not so sold on the slim variant. If someone is capable of assembling a distribution matching to their use-case, do they even need a slim distribution in the first place? I really want us to stick to 1 distribution type, as I'm worried about the implications of 2 or FWIW any number of additional distribution types: - you need separate assemblies, including a new profile - adjusting opt/plugins and making sure the examples match the bundled contents (e.g., no gelly/python, maybe some SQL examples if there are any that use a connector) - another 300mb uploaded to dist.apache.org + whatever the fat distribution grows by x3 (scala 2.11/2.12 + python) - the latter naturally being susceptible to additional growth in the future - this is also a pain for release managers
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Thanks everyone for this lively discussion and all your thoughts. Let me try to summarise the current state of the discussion and then let's see how we can move it forward. To begin with, I think everyone agrees that we want to improve Flink's user experience. In particular, we want to improve the experience of first time users who want to try out Flink's SQL functionality. The problem which stands in the way of a good user experience is that the current Flink distribution contains too few dependencies for a smooth first time SQL experience and too many dependencies for a lean production setup. Hence, Aljoscha proposed to create a "fat" and "slim" Flink distribution addressing these two differing needs. As far as the discussion goes there are two remaining discussion points. 1. How do we serve the different types of distributions? a) Create a "fat" and "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site. b) Create a "slim" distribution which is served from the Flink web site and have a tool (e.g. script) which can turn a slim distribution into a fat distribution by downloading additional dependencies. For a) speaks that it is simpler and does not require the user to execute an additional step. The downside is that we will add another dimension to the release matrix which will complicate the release process (see Chesnay's last comment for more details). For b) speaks that it is potentially the more general solution as we can provide different options for different distributions (e.g. choosing a connector version, required filesystems, metric reporters, etc.). The downside is the additional step for the user and that we need such a tool (which in itself could be quite complex). 2. What is contained in the "fat" distribution? The current proposal is to move everything which can be moved from opt to the plugins directory to the plugins directory (metric reporters and filesystems). That way the user will be able to use all of these implementations without running into dependency conflicts. For the SQL support, Aljoscha proposed to add: flink-avro-1.10.0.jar flink-csv-1.10.0.jar flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-json-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar sql-connectors-formats How to move forward from here? Given that the time until the feature freeze is limited I would actually propose to follow the simplest approach which is the creation of two distributions ("fat" & "slim"). We can still rethink this decision at a later point and introduce a tool which allows to download a custom build Flink distribution. At this point we could then remove the "fat" jar from the web site. Of course, this comes at the cost of increased release complexity but I believe that the user experience will make up for it. For the what to include, I think we could take Aljoscha's proposal and then see what other dependencies the most common SQL use cases require. I guess that the SQL guys know quite precisely where the users run into problems. I know that this solution might not be perfect (in particular wrt releases) but I hope that everyone could live with this solution for the time being. Feel free to add anything I might have forgotten to mention here. Cheers, Till On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:43 AM Chesnay Schepler wrote: > It would be good if we could nail down what a slim/fat distribution > would look like, as there are various ideas floating around in this thread. > > Like, what is a "slim" distribution? Are we just emptying /opt? Removing > everything larger than 1mb? Are we throwing out the Table API from /lib > for a minimal streaming distribution? > Are we going ham and remove the YARN integration from the flink-dist jar? > > While I can see how a fat distribution can certainly help for the > out-of-the-box experience, I'm not so sold on the slim variant. > If someone is capable of assembling a distribution matching to their > use-case, do they even need a slim distribution in the first place? > > I really want us to stick to 1 distribution type, as I'm worried about > the implications of 2 or FWIW any number of additional distribution types: > > - you need separate assemblies, including a new profile > - adjusting opt/plugins and making sure the examples match the > bundled contents (e.g., no gelly/python, maybe some SQL examples if > there are any that use a connector) > - another 300mb uploaded to dist.apache.org + whatever the fat > distribution grows by x3 (scala 2.11/2.12 + python) > - the latter naturally being susceptible to additional growth in > the future > - this is also a pain for release managers since SVN likes to throw > up if the upload is too large + it increases upload time > - another 2 distributions to test during a release > - another distribution type we need to test via CI > - more content downloaded into the docker images by default > - unless of course we
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
It would be good if we could nail down what a slim/fat distribution would look like, as there are various ideas floating around in this thread. Like, what is a "slim" distribution? Are we just emptying /opt? Removing everything larger than 1mb? Are we throwing out the Table API from /lib for a minimal streaming distribution? Are we going ham and remove the YARN integration from the flink-dist jar? While I can see how a fat distribution can certainly help for the out-of-the-box experience, I'm not so sold on the slim variant. If someone is capable of assembling a distribution matching to their use-case, do they even need a slim distribution in the first place? I really want us to stick to 1 distribution type, as I'm worried about the implications of 2 or FWIW any number of additional distribution types: - you need separate assemblies, including a new profile - adjusting opt/plugins and making sure the examples match the bundled contents (e.g., no gelly/python, maybe some SQL examples if there are any that use a connector) - another 300mb uploaded to dist.apache.org + whatever the fat distribution grows by x3 (scala 2.11/2.12 + python) - the latter naturally being susceptible to additional growth in the future - this is also a pain for release managers since SVN likes to throw up if the upload is too large + it increases upload time - another 2 distributions to test during a release - another distribution type we need to test via CI - more content downloaded into the docker images by default - unless of course we release separate slim/fat images (where we would then circle back to the above 2 points, just docker-flavored) - any further addition to the release matrix implies an additional 4 distributions => long-term ramifications - e.g., another scala version On 24/04/2020 15:15, Kurt Young wrote: +1 for "slim" and "fat" solution. One comment about the fat one, I think we need to put all needed jars into /lib (or /plugins). Put jars into /opt and relying on users moving them from /opt to /lib doesn't really improve the out-of-box experience. Best, Kurt On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 8:28 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: re (1): I don't know about that, probably the people that did the metrics reporter plugin support had some thoughts about that. re (2): I agree, that's why I initially suggested to split it into "slim" and "fat" because our current "medium fat" selection of jars in Flink dist does not serve anyone too well. It's too fat for people that want to build lean application images. It's to lean for people that want a good first out-of-box experience. Aljoscha On 17.04.20 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs may be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. I would still drop two more thoughts: (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the class path any more. (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the default, though. On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want to have. Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As mentioned we have these jars in opt/: 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 160M opt The "filesystem" connectors
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
This would likely solve the issues surrounding the SQL client, so I would go along with that. On 17/04/2020 12:16, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want to have. Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As mentioned we have these jars in opt/: 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 160M opt The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar 24M sql-connectors-formats We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink dist. So maybe we should do that instead? We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, which is also not in lib/. What do you think? Best, Aljoscha On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: Hi, I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step can't be omitted anyway). We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default selects some popular connectors. Best, Jark On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at https://code.quarkus.io/ You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. Rafi On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and you're right that only hides the problem for some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? Would't that be good enough for us to try? Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a dozen times and I won't see such questions coming up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every day. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall into these particular use-cases. Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, which directory to put it in). It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from opt to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting the feature and having the tool handle the rest. As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would take. It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 for "slim" and "fat" solution. One comment about the fat one, I think we need to put all needed jars into /lib (or /plugins). Put jars into /opt and relying on users moving them from /opt to /lib doesn't really improve the out-of-box experience. Best, Kurt On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 8:28 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > re (1): I don't know about that, probably the people that did the > metrics reporter plugin support had some thoughts about that. > > re (2): I agree, that's why I initially suggested to split it into > "slim" and "fat" because our current "medium fat" selection of jars in > Flink dist does not serve anyone too well. It's too fat for people that > want to build lean application images. It's to lean for people that want > a good first out-of-box experience. > > Aljoscha > > On 17.04.20 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs > may > > be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. > > > > I would still drop two more thoughts: > > > > (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics > > reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the > > class path any more. > > > > (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker > > file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as > > possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the > > default, though. > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > > >> I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice > >> but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial > >> observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I > >> talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other > >> support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because > >> of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools > >> would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra > >> step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the > >> annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want > >> to have. > >> > >> Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea > >> and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > >> mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > >> > >>17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > >> 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > >> 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > >> 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > >>10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > >>12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > >>36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > >> 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > >> 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >> 160M opt > >> > >> The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > >> > >> I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: > >> > >>73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > >>36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > >>55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > >>20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >> 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > >>24M sql-connectors-formats > >> > >> We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up > >> by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from > >> opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink > >> dist. So maybe we should do that instead? > >> > >> We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up > >> the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to > >> lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, > >> which is also not in lib/. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Best, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the > >>> https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. > >>> All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this > >> step > >>> can't be omitted anyway). > >>> We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default > >>> selects some popular connectors. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Jark > >>> > >>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: > >>> > As a reference for a nice
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
re (1): I don't know about that, probably the people that did the metrics reporter plugin support had some thoughts about that. re (2): I agree, that's why I initially suggested to split it into "slim" and "fat" because our current "medium fat" selection of jars in Flink dist does not serve anyone too well. It's too fat for people that want to build lean application images. It's to lean for people that want a good first out-of-box experience. Aljoscha On 17.04.20 16:38, Stephan Ewen wrote: @Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs may be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. I would still drop two more thoughts: (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the class path any more. (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the default, though. On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want to have. Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As mentioned we have these jars in opt/: 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 160M opt The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar 24M sql-connectors-formats We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink dist. So maybe we should do that instead? We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, which is also not in lib/. What do you think? Best, Aljoscha On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: Hi, I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step can't be omitted anyway). We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default selects some popular connectors. Best, Jark On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at https://code.quarkus.io/ You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. Rafi On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and you're right that only hides the problem for some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? Would't that be good enough for us to try? Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a dozen times and I won't see such questions coming up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every day. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: The problem with having a
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
@Aljoscha I think that is an interesting line of thinking. the swift-fs may be rarely enough used to move it to an optional download. I would still drop two more thoughts: (1) Now that we have plugins support, is there a reason to have a metrics reporter or file system in /opt instead of /plugins? They don't spoil the class path any more. (2) I can imagine there still being a desire to have a "minimal" docker file, for users that want to keep the container images as small as possible, to speed up deployment. It is fine if that would not be the default, though. On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:16 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice > but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial > observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I > talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other > support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because > of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools > would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra > step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the > annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want > to have. > > Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea > and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As > mentioned we have these jars in opt/: > > 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > 160M opt > > The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. > > I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: > > 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar > 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar > 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar > 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar > 24M sql-connectors-formats > > We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up > by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from > opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink > dist. So maybe we should do that instead? > > We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up > the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to > lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, > which is also not in lib/. > > What do you think? > > Best, > Aljoscha > > On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the > > https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. > > All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this > step > > can't be omitted anyway). > > We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default > > selects some popular connectors. > > > > Best, > > Jark > > > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: > > > >> As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at > >> https://code.quarkus.io/ > >> You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project > homepage. > >> > >> Rafi > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: > >> > >>> I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and > >>> you're right that only hides the problem for > >>> some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% > users? > >>> Would't that be good enough for us to try? > >>> > >>> Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big > >>> problem? > >>> I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a > >>> dozen times and I won't see such questions coming > >>> up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions > >> every > >>> day. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Kurt > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler > >>> wrote: > >>> > The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it > doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall > into these particular use-cases. > Move out of it and you once
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I think having such tools and/or tailor-made distributions can be nice but I also think the discussion is missing the main point: The initial observation/motivation is that apparently a lot of users (Kurt and I talked about this) on the chinese DingTalk support groups, and other support channels have problems when first using the SQL client because of these missing connectors/formats. For these, having additional tools would not solve anything because they would also not take that extra step. I think that even tiny friction should be avoided because the annoyance from it accumulates of the (hopefully) many users that we want to have. Maybe we should take a step back from discussing the "fat"/"slim" idea and instead think about the composition of the current dist. As mentioned we have these jars in opt/: 17M flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 52K flink-cep-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 180K flink-cep_2.11-1.10.0.jar 746K flink-gelly-scala_2.11-1.10.0.jar 626K flink-gelly_2.11-1.10.0.jar 512K flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar 159K flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar 1.0M flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar 102K flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar 10K flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar 12K flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar 36M flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 28M flink-python_2.11-1.10.0.jar 22K flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.11-1.10.0.jar 18M flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 31M flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar 196K flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar 518K flink-sql-client_2.11-1.10.0.jar 99K flink-state-processor-api_2.11-1.10.0.jar 25M flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar 160M opt The "filesystem" connectors ar ethe heavy hitters, there. I downloaded most of the SQL connectors/formats and this is what I got: 73K flink-avro-1.10.0.jar 36K flink-csv-1.10.0.jar 55K flink-hbase_2.11-1.10.0.jar 88K flink-jdbc_2.11-1.10.0.jar 42K flink-json-1.10.0.jar 20M flink-sql-connector-elasticsearch6_2.11-1.10.0.jar 2.8M flink-sql-connector-kafka_2.11-1.10.0.jar 24M sql-connectors-formats We could just add these to the Flink distribution without blowing it up by much. We could drop any of the existing "filesystem" connectors from opt and add the SQL connectors/formats and not change the size of Flink dist. So maybe we should do that instead? We would need some tooling for the sql-client shell script to pick-up the connectors/formats up from opt/ because we don't want to add them to lib/. We're already doing that for finding the flink-sql-client jar, which is also not in lib/. What do you think? Best, Aljoscha On 17.04.20 05:22, Jark Wu wrote: Hi, I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step can't be omitted anyway). We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default selects some popular connectors. Best, Jark On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at https://code.quarkus.io/ You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. Rafi On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and you're right that only hides the problem for some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? Would't that be good enough for us to try? Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a dozen times and I won't see such questions coming up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every day. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall into these particular use-cases. Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, which directory to put it in). It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from opt to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting the feature and having the tool handle the rest. As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would take. It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven central (note: not necessarily *using* maven); this should would work in China, no? A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
A similar issue exists for the docker files. I also heard the fame feedback from various users, for example why we don't simply include all FS connectors in the images by default. I actually like the idea of having a slim and a fat/convenience docker file. - If you build a clean production image, you start with slim and add the jars you need. - If you just want to get started and play around, it is nice to have many popular connectors directly available. Even if this only meets the 90% popular cases, that is a good win. Users are not code after all, the simplest minimal solution is not always what resonates best with them. On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 5:22 AM Jark Wu wrote: > Hi, > > I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the > https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. > All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step > can't be omitted anyway). > We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default > selects some popular connectors. > > Best, > Jark > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: > > > As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at > > https://code.quarkus.io/ > > You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project > homepage. > > > > Rafi > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: > > > > > I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and > > > you're right that only hides the problem for > > > some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% > users? > > > Would't that be good enough for us to try? > > > > > > Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big > > > problem? > > > I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a > > > dozen times and I won't see such questions coming > > > up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions > > every > > > day. > > > > > > Best, > > > Kurt > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler > > > wrote: > > > > > > > The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that > it > > > > doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall > > > > into these particular use-cases. > > > > Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems > > out-lined. > > > > > > > > This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal > with > > it > > > > from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. > > > > > > > > Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? > > > > I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not > > > > necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, > > which > > > > directory to put it in). > > > > It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? > > > > I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from > > opt > > > > to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just > selecting > > > the > > > > feature and having the tool handle the rest. > > > > > > > > As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would > > take. > > > > It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven > > > > central (note: not necessarily *using* maven); this should would work > > in > > > > China, no? > > > > > > > > A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible > this > > > is > > > > with the ASF infrastructure. > > > > You wouldn't be able to mirror the distribution, so the load can't be > > > > distributed. I doubt INFRA would like this. > > > > > > > > Note that third-parties could also start distributing use-case > oriented > > > > distributions, which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. > > > > > > > > On 16/04/2020 16:57, Kurt Young wrote: > > > > > > > > I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I > have > > > for > > > > this approach is the final generated > > > > distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many > > > > different combinations when user trying to > > > > package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop > > > > releases. As far as I can tell, most open > > > > source projects and apache projects will only release some > > > > pre-defined distributions, which most users are already > > > > familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through > in > > > > some cases, users will try to re-distribute > > > > the release package, because of the unstable network of apache > website > > > from > > > > China. In web tool solution, I don't > > > > think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. > > > > > > > > In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into > our > > > trap > > > > again if we try to offer this smart & flexible > > > > solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. > It's > > > > exactly the situation what we
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi, I like the idea of web tool to assemble fat distribution. And the https://code.quarkus.io/ looks very nice. All the users need to do is just select what he/she need (I think this step can't be omitted anyway). We can also provide a default fat distribution on the web which default selects some popular connectors. Best, Jark On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 02:29, Rafi Aroch wrote: > As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at > https://code.quarkus.io/ > You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. > > Rafi > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: > > > I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and > > you're right that only hides the problem for > > some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? > > Would't that be good enough for us to try? > > > > Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big > > problem? > > I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a > > dozen times and I won't see such questions coming > > up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions > every > > day. > > > > Best, > > Kurt > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler > > wrote: > > > > > The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it > > > doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall > > > into these particular use-cases. > > > Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems > out-lined. > > > > > > This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with > it > > > from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. > > > > > > Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? > > > I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not > > > necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, > which > > > directory to put it in). > > > It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? > > > I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from > opt > > > to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting > > the > > > feature and having the tool handle the rest. > > > > > > As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would > take. > > > It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven > > > central (note: not necessarily *using* maven); this should would work > in > > > China, no? > > > > > > A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible this > > is > > > with the ASF infrastructure. > > > You wouldn't be able to mirror the distribution, so the load can't be > > > distributed. I doubt INFRA would like this. > > > > > > Note that third-parties could also start distributing use-case oriented > > > distributions, which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. > > > > > > On 16/04/2020 16:57, Kurt Young wrote: > > > > > > I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I have > > for > > > this approach is the final generated > > > distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many > > > different combinations when user trying to > > > package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop > > > releases. As far as I can tell, most open > > > source projects and apache projects will only release some > > > pre-defined distributions, which most users are already > > > familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through in > > > some cases, users will try to re-distribute > > > the release package, because of the unstable network of apache website > > from > > > China. In web tool solution, I don't > > > think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. > > > > > > In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into our > > trap > > > again if we try to offer this smart & flexible > > > solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. It's > > > exactly the situation what we currently fell > > > into: > > > 1. We offered a smart solution. > > > 2. We hope users will follow the correct instructions. > > > 3. Everything will work as expected if users followed the right > > > instructions. > > > > > > In reality, I suspect not all users will do the second step correctly. > > And > > > for new users who only trying to have a quick > > > experience with Flink, I would bet most users will do it wrong. > > > > > > So, my proposal would be one of the following 2 options: > > > 1. Provide a slim distribution for advanced product users and provide a > > > distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. > > > 2. Only provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin > jars. > > > > > > If we are trying to reduce the distributions we released, I would > prefer > > 2 > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > Best, > > > Kurt > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:33 PM Till
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
As a reference for a nice first-experience I had, take a look at https://code.quarkus.io/ You reach this page after you click "Start Coding" at the project homepage. Rafi On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 6:53 PM Kurt Young wrote: > I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and > you're right that only hides the problem for > some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? > Would't that be good enough for us to try? > > Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big > problem? > I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a > dozen times and I won't see such questions coming > up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every > day. > > Best, > Kurt > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler > wrote: > > > The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it > > doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall > > into these particular use-cases. > > Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. > > > > This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it > > from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. > > > > Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? > > I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not > > necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, which > > directory to put it in). > > It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? > > I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from opt > > to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting > the > > feature and having the tool handle the rest. > > > > As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would take. > > It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven > > central (note: not necessarily *using* maven); this should would work in > > China, no? > > > > A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible this > is > > with the ASF infrastructure. > > You wouldn't be able to mirror the distribution, so the load can't be > > distributed. I doubt INFRA would like this. > > > > Note that third-parties could also start distributing use-case oriented > > distributions, which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. > > > > On 16/04/2020 16:57, Kurt Young wrote: > > > > I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I have > for > > this approach is the final generated > > distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many > > different combinations when user trying to > > package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop > > releases. As far as I can tell, most open > > source projects and apache projects will only release some > > pre-defined distributions, which most users are already > > familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through in > > some cases, users will try to re-distribute > > the release package, because of the unstable network of apache website > from > > China. In web tool solution, I don't > > think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. > > > > In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into our > trap > > again if we try to offer this smart & flexible > > solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. It's > > exactly the situation what we currently fell > > into: > > 1. We offered a smart solution. > > 2. We hope users will follow the correct instructions. > > 3. Everything will work as expected if users followed the right > > instructions. > > > > In reality, I suspect not all users will do the second step correctly. > And > > for new users who only trying to have a quick > > experience with Flink, I would bet most users will do it wrong. > > > > So, my proposal would be one of the following 2 options: > > 1. Provide a slim distribution for advanced product users and provide a > > distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. > > 2. Only provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. > > > > If we are trying to reduce the distributions we released, I would prefer > 2 > > > > 1. > > > > Best, > > Kurt > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:33 PM Till Rohrmann < > trohrm...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > I think what Chesnay and Dawid proposed would be the ideal solution. > > Ideally, we would also have a nice web tool for the website which > generates > > the corresponding distribution for download. > > > > To get things started we could start with only supporting to > > download/creating the "fat" version with the script. The fat version > would > > then consist of the slim distribution and whatever we deem important for > > new users to get started. > > > > Cheers, > > Till > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:33 AM Dawid Wysakowicz < >
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I'm not saying pre-bundle some jars will make this problem go away, and you're right that only hides the problem for some users. But what if this solution can hide the problem for 90% users? Would't that be good enough for us to try? Regarding to would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I'm afraid yes. Otherwise I won't answer such questions for at least a dozen times and I won't see such questions coming up from time to time. During some periods, I even saw such questions every day. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:21 PM Chesnay Schepler wrote: > The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it > doesn't really *solve* a problem, it just hides it for users who fall > into these particular use-cases. > Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. > > This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it > from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. > > Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? > I would expect that users generally know *what *they need, just not > necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, which > directory to put it in). > It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? > I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from opt > to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting the > feature and having the tool handle the rest. > > As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would take. > It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven > central (note: not necessarily *using* maven); this should would work in > China, no? > > A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible this is > with the ASF infrastructure. > You wouldn't be able to mirror the distribution, so the load can't be > distributed. I doubt INFRA would like this. > > Note that third-parties could also start distributing use-case oriented > distributions, which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. > > On 16/04/2020 16:57, Kurt Young wrote: > > I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I have for > this approach is the final generated > distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many > different combinations when user trying to > package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop > releases. As far as I can tell, most open > source projects and apache projects will only release some > pre-defined distributions, which most users are already > familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through in > some cases, users will try to re-distribute > the release package, because of the unstable network of apache website from > China. In web tool solution, I don't > think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. > > In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into our trap > again if we try to offer this smart & flexible > solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. It's > exactly the situation what we currently fell > into: > 1. We offered a smart solution. > 2. We hope users will follow the correct instructions. > 3. Everything will work as expected if users followed the right > instructions. > > In reality, I suspect not all users will do the second step correctly. And > for new users who only trying to have a quick > experience with Flink, I would bet most users will do it wrong. > > So, my proposal would be one of the following 2 options: > 1. Provide a slim distribution for advanced product users and provide a > distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. > 2. Only provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. > > If we are trying to reduce the distributions we released, I would prefer 2 > > 1. > > Best, > Kurt > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:33 PM Till Rohrmann > wrote: > > > I think what Chesnay and Dawid proposed would be the ideal solution. > Ideally, we would also have a nice web tool for the website which generates > the corresponding distribution for download. > > To get things started we could start with only supporting to > download/creating the "fat" version with the script. The fat version would > then consist of the slim distribution and whatever we deem important for > new users to get started. > > Cheers, > Till > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:33 AM Dawid Wysakowicz > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Few points from my side: > > 1. I like the idea of simplifying the experience for first time users. > As for production use cases I share Jark's opinion that in this case I > would expect users to combine their distribution manually. I think in > such scenarios it is important to understand interconnections. > Personally I'd expect the slimmest possible distribution that I can > extend further with what I need in my production scenario. > > 2. I think there is also
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
The problem with having a distribution with "popular" stuff is that it doesn't really /solve/ a problem, it just hides it for users who fall into these particular use-cases. Move out of it and you once again run into exact same problems out-lined. This is exactly why I like the tooling approach; you have to deal with it from the start and transitioning to a custom use-case is easier. Would users following instructions really be such a big problem? I would expect that users generally know /what /they need, just not necessarily how it is assembled correctly (where do get which jar, which directory to put it in). It seems like these are exactly the problem this would solve? I just don't see how moving a jar corresponding to some feature from opt to some directory (lib/plugins) is less error-prone than just selecting the feature and having the tool handle the rest. As for re-distributions, it depends on the form that the tool would take. It could be an application that runs locally and works against maven central (note: not necessarily /using/ maven); this should would work in China, no? A web tool would of course be fancy, but I don't know how feasible this is with the ASF infrastructure. You wouldn't be able to mirror the distribution, so the load can't be distributed. I doubt INFRA would like this. Note that third-parties could also start distributing use-case oriented distributions, which would be perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. On 16/04/2020 16:57, Kurt Young wrote: I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I have for this approach is the final generated distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many different combinations when user trying to package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop releases. As far as I can tell, most open source projects and apache projects will only release some pre-defined distributions, which most users are already familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through in some cases, users will try to re-distribute the release package, because of the unstable network of apache website from China. In web tool solution, I don't think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into our trap again if we try to offer this smart & flexible solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. It's exactly the situation what we currently fell into: 1. We offered a smart solution. 2. We hope users will follow the correct instructions. 3. Everything will work as expected if users followed the right instructions. In reality, I suspect not all users will do the second step correctly. And for new users who only trying to have a quick experience with Flink, I would bet most users will do it wrong. So, my proposal would be one of the following 2 options: 1. Provide a slim distribution for advanced product users and provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. 2. Only provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. If we are trying to reduce the distributions we released, I would prefer 2 1. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:33 PM Till Rohrmann wrote: I think what Chesnay and Dawid proposed would be the ideal solution. Ideally, we would also have a nice web tool for the website which generates the corresponding distribution for download. To get things started we could start with only supporting to download/creating the "fat" version with the script. The fat version would then consist of the slim distribution and whatever we deem important for new users to get started. Cheers, Till On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:33 AM Dawid Wysakowicz wrote: Hi all, Few points from my side: 1. I like the idea of simplifying the experience for first time users. As for production use cases I share Jark's opinion that in this case I would expect users to combine their distribution manually. I think in such scenarios it is important to understand interconnections. Personally I'd expect the slimmest possible distribution that I can extend further with what I need in my production scenario. 2. I think there is also the problem that the matrix of possible combinations that can be useful is already big. Do we want to have a distribution for: SQL users: which connectors should we include? should we include hive? which other catalog? DataStream users: which connectors should we include? For both of the above should we include yarn/kubernetes? I would opt for providing only the "slim" distribution as a release artifact. 3. However, as I said I think its worth investigating how we can improve users experience. What do you think of providing a tool, could be e.g. a shell script that constructs a distribution based on users choice. I think that was also what Chesnay mentioned as "tooling to assemble custom distributions" In the end how I see the
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I'm not so sure about the web tool solution though. The concern I have for this approach is the final generated distribution is kind of non-deterministic. We might generate too many different combinations when user trying to package different types of connector, format, and even maybe hadoop releases. As far as I can tell, most open source projects and apache projects will only release some pre-defined distributions, which most users are already familiar with, thus hard to change IMO. And I also have went through in some cases, users will try to re-distribute the release package, because of the unstable network of apache website from China. In web tool solution, I don't think this kind of re-distribution would be possible anymore. In the meantime, I also have a concern that we will fall back into our trap again if we try to offer this smart & flexible solution. Because it needs users to cooperate with such mechanism. It's exactly the situation what we currently fell into: 1. We offered a smart solution. 2. We hope users will follow the correct instructions. 3. Everything will work as expected if users followed the right instructions. In reality, I suspect not all users will do the second step correctly. And for new users who only trying to have a quick experience with Flink, I would bet most users will do it wrong. So, my proposal would be one of the following 2 options: 1. Provide a slim distribution for advanced product users and provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. 2. Only provide a distribution which will have some popular builtin jars. If we are trying to reduce the distributions we released, I would prefer 2 > 1. Best, Kurt On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 9:33 PM Till Rohrmann wrote: > I think what Chesnay and Dawid proposed would be the ideal solution. > Ideally, we would also have a nice web tool for the website which generates > the corresponding distribution for download. > > To get things started we could start with only supporting to > download/creating the "fat" version with the script. The fat version would > then consist of the slim distribution and whatever we deem important for > new users to get started. > > Cheers, > Till > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:33 AM Dawid Wysakowicz > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Few points from my side: > > > > 1. I like the idea of simplifying the experience for first time users. > > As for production use cases I share Jark's opinion that in this case I > > would expect users to combine their distribution manually. I think in > > such scenarios it is important to understand interconnections. > > Personally I'd expect the slimmest possible distribution that I can > > extend further with what I need in my production scenario. > > > > 2. I think there is also the problem that the matrix of possible > > combinations that can be useful is already big. Do we want to have a > > distribution for: > > > > SQL users: which connectors should we include? should we include > > hive? which other catalog? > > > > DataStream users: which connectors should we include? > > > >For both of the above should we include yarn/kubernetes? > > > > I would opt for providing only the "slim" distribution as a release > > artifact. > > > > 3. However, as I said I think its worth investigating how we can improve > > users experience. What do you think of providing a tool, could be e.g. a > > shell script that constructs a distribution based on users choice. I > > think that was also what Chesnay mentioned as "tooling to > > assemble custom distributions" In the end how I see the difference > > between a slim and fat distribution is which jars do we put into the > > lib, right? It could have a few "screens". > > > > 1. Which API are you interested in: > > a. SQL API > > b. DataStream API > > > > > > 2. [SQL] Which connectors do you want to use? [multichoice]: > > a. Kafka > > b. Elasticsearch > > ... > > > > 3. [SQL] Which catalog you want to use? > > > > ... > > > > Such a tool would download all the dependencies from maven and put them > > into the correct folder. In the future we can extend it with additional > > rules e.g. kafka-0.9 cannot be chosen at the same time with > > kafka-universal etc. > > > > The benefit of it would be that the distribution that we release could > > remain "slim" or we could even make it slimmer. I might be missing > > something here though. > > > > Best, > > > > Dawdi > > > > On 16/04/2020 11:02, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > > > I want to reinforce my opinion from earlier: This is about improving > > > the situation both for first-time users and for experienced users that > > > want to use a Flink dist in production. The current Flink dist is too > > > "thin" for first-time SQL users and it is too "fat" for production > > > users, that is where serving no-one properly with the current > > > middle-ground. That's why I think introducing those specialized > > > "spins" of Flink dist would be good. > > > > > > By the
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I think what Chesnay and Dawid proposed would be the ideal solution. Ideally, we would also have a nice web tool for the website which generates the corresponding distribution for download. To get things started we could start with only supporting to download/creating the "fat" version with the script. The fat version would then consist of the slim distribution and whatever we deem important for new users to get started. Cheers, Till On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 11:33 AM Dawid Wysakowicz wrote: > Hi all, > > Few points from my side: > > 1. I like the idea of simplifying the experience for first time users. > As for production use cases I share Jark's opinion that in this case I > would expect users to combine their distribution manually. I think in > such scenarios it is important to understand interconnections. > Personally I'd expect the slimmest possible distribution that I can > extend further with what I need in my production scenario. > > 2. I think there is also the problem that the matrix of possible > combinations that can be useful is already big. Do we want to have a > distribution for: > > SQL users: which connectors should we include? should we include > hive? which other catalog? > > DataStream users: which connectors should we include? > >For both of the above should we include yarn/kubernetes? > > I would opt for providing only the "slim" distribution as a release > artifact. > > 3. However, as I said I think its worth investigating how we can improve > users experience. What do you think of providing a tool, could be e.g. a > shell script that constructs a distribution based on users choice. I > think that was also what Chesnay mentioned as "tooling to > assemble custom distributions" In the end how I see the difference > between a slim and fat distribution is which jars do we put into the > lib, right? It could have a few "screens". > > 1. Which API are you interested in: > a. SQL API > b. DataStream API > > > 2. [SQL] Which connectors do you want to use? [multichoice]: > a. Kafka > b. Elasticsearch > ... > > 3. [SQL] Which catalog you want to use? > > ... > > Such a tool would download all the dependencies from maven and put them > into the correct folder. In the future we can extend it with additional > rules e.g. kafka-0.9 cannot be chosen at the same time with > kafka-universal etc. > > The benefit of it would be that the distribution that we release could > remain "slim" or we could even make it slimmer. I might be missing > something here though. > > Best, > > Dawdi > > On 16/04/2020 11:02, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > > I want to reinforce my opinion from earlier: This is about improving > > the situation both for first-time users and for experienced users that > > want to use a Flink dist in production. The current Flink dist is too > > "thin" for first-time SQL users and it is too "fat" for production > > users, that is where serving no-one properly with the current > > middle-ground. That's why I think introducing those specialized > > "spins" of Flink dist would be good. > > > > By the way, at some point in the future production users might not > > even need to get a Flink dist anymore. They should be able to have > > Flink as a dependency of their project (including the runtime) and > > then build an image from this for Kubernetes or a fat jar for YARN. > > > > Aljoscha > > > > On 15.04.20 18:14, wenlong.lwl wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Regarding slim and fat distributions, I think different kinds of jobs > >> may > >> prefer different type of distribution: > >> > >> For DataStream job, I think we may not like fat distribution containing > >> connectors because user would always need to depend on the connector in > >> user code, it is easy to include the connector jar in the user lib. Less > >> jar in lib means less class conflicts and problems. > >> > >> For SQL job, I think we are trying to encourage user to user pure > >> sql(DDL + > >> DML) to construct their job, In order to improve user experience, It > >> may be > >> important for flink, not only providing as many connector jar in > >> distribution as possible especially the connector and format we have > >> well > >> documented, but also providing an mechanism to load connectors > >> according > >> to the DDLs, > >> > >> So I think it could be good to place connector/format jars in some > >> dir like > >> opt/connector which would not affect jobs by default, and introduce a > >> mechanism of dynamic discovery for SQL. > >> > >> Best, > >> Wenlong > >> > >> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 22:46, Jingsong Li > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I am thinking both "improve first experience" and "improve production > >>> experience". > >>> > >>> I'm thinking about what's the common mode of Flink? > >>> Streaming job use Kafka? Batch job use Hive? > >>> > >>> Hive 1.2.1 dependencies can be compatible with most of Hive server > >>> versions. So Spark and Presto have built-in Hive 1.2.1 dependency. > >>> Flink is
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi all, Few points from my side: 1. I like the idea of simplifying the experience for first time users. As for production use cases I share Jark's opinion that in this case I would expect users to combine their distribution manually. I think in such scenarios it is important to understand interconnections. Personally I'd expect the slimmest possible distribution that I can extend further with what I need in my production scenario. 2. I think there is also the problem that the matrix of possible combinations that can be useful is already big. Do we want to have a distribution for: SQL users: which connectors should we include? should we include hive? which other catalog? DataStream users: which connectors should we include? For both of the above should we include yarn/kubernetes? I would opt for providing only the "slim" distribution as a release artifact. 3. However, as I said I think its worth investigating how we can improve users experience. What do you think of providing a tool, could be e.g. a shell script that constructs a distribution based on users choice. I think that was also what Chesnay mentioned as "tooling to assemble custom distributions" In the end how I see the difference between a slim and fat distribution is which jars do we put into the lib, right? It could have a few "screens". 1. Which API are you interested in: a. SQL API b. DataStream API 2. [SQL] Which connectors do you want to use? [multichoice]: a. Kafka b. Elasticsearch ... 3. [SQL] Which catalog you want to use? ... Such a tool would download all the dependencies from maven and put them into the correct folder. In the future we can extend it with additional rules e.g. kafka-0.9 cannot be chosen at the same time with kafka-universal etc. The benefit of it would be that the distribution that we release could remain "slim" or we could even make it slimmer. I might be missing something here though. Best, Dawdi On 16/04/2020 11:02, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > I want to reinforce my opinion from earlier: This is about improving > the situation both for first-time users and for experienced users that > want to use a Flink dist in production. The current Flink dist is too > "thin" for first-time SQL users and it is too "fat" for production > users, that is where serving no-one properly with the current > middle-ground. That's why I think introducing those specialized > "spins" of Flink dist would be good. > > By the way, at some point in the future production users might not > even need to get a Flink dist anymore. They should be able to have > Flink as a dependency of their project (including the runtime) and > then build an image from this for Kubernetes or a fat jar for YARN. > > Aljoscha > > On 15.04.20 18:14, wenlong.lwl wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Regarding slim and fat distributions, I think different kinds of jobs >> may >> prefer different type of distribution: >> >> For DataStream job, I think we may not like fat distribution containing >> connectors because user would always need to depend on the connector in >> user code, it is easy to include the connector jar in the user lib. Less >> jar in lib means less class conflicts and problems. >> >> For SQL job, I think we are trying to encourage user to user pure >> sql(DDL + >> DML) to construct their job, In order to improve user experience, It >> may be >> important for flink, not only providing as many connector jar in >> distribution as possible especially the connector and format we have >> well >> documented, but also providing an mechanism to load connectors >> according >> to the DDLs, >> >> So I think it could be good to place connector/format jars in some >> dir like >> opt/connector which would not affect jobs by default, and introduce a >> mechanism of dynamic discovery for SQL. >> >> Best, >> Wenlong >> >> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 22:46, Jingsong Li >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am thinking both "improve first experience" and "improve production >>> experience". >>> >>> I'm thinking about what's the common mode of Flink? >>> Streaming job use Kafka? Batch job use Hive? >>> >>> Hive 1.2.1 dependencies can be compatible with most of Hive server >>> versions. So Spark and Presto have built-in Hive 1.2.1 dependency. >>> Flink is currently mainly used for streaming, so let's not talk >>> about hive. >>> >>> For streaming jobs, first of all, the jobs in my mind is (related to >>> connectors): >>> - ETL jobs: Kafka -> Kafka >>> - Join jobs: Kafka -> DimJDBC -> Kafka >>> - Aggregation jobs: Kafka -> JDBCSink >>> So Kafka and JDBC are probably the most commonly used. Of course, also >>> includes CSV, JSON's formats. >>> So when we provide such a fat distribution: >>> - With CSV, JSON. >>> - With flink-kafka-universal and kafka dependencies. >>> - With flink-jdbc. >>> Using this fat distribution, most users can run their jobs well. (jdbc >>> driver jar required, but this is very natural to do) >>> Can these dependencies lead to kinds of conflicts?
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I want to reinforce my opinion from earlier: This is about improving the situation both for first-time users and for experienced users that want to use a Flink dist in production. The current Flink dist is too "thin" for first-time SQL users and it is too "fat" for production users, that is where serving no-one properly with the current middle-ground. That's why I think introducing those specialized "spins" of Flink dist would be good. By the way, at some point in the future production users might not even need to get a Flink dist anymore. They should be able to have Flink as a dependency of their project (including the runtime) and then build an image from this for Kubernetes or a fat jar for YARN. Aljoscha On 15.04.20 18:14, wenlong.lwl wrote: Hi all, Regarding slim and fat distributions, I think different kinds of jobs may prefer different type of distribution: For DataStream job, I think we may not like fat distribution containing connectors because user would always need to depend on the connector in user code, it is easy to include the connector jar in the user lib. Less jar in lib means less class conflicts and problems. For SQL job, I think we are trying to encourage user to user pure sql(DDL + DML) to construct their job, In order to improve user experience, It may be important for flink, not only providing as many connector jar in distribution as possible especially the connector and format we have well documented, but also providing an mechanism to load connectors according to the DDLs, So I think it could be good to place connector/format jars in some dir like opt/connector which would not affect jobs by default, and introduce a mechanism of dynamic discovery for SQL. Best, Wenlong On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 22:46, Jingsong Li wrote: Hi, I am thinking both "improve first experience" and "improve production experience". I'm thinking about what's the common mode of Flink? Streaming job use Kafka? Batch job use Hive? Hive 1.2.1 dependencies can be compatible with most of Hive server versions. So Spark and Presto have built-in Hive 1.2.1 dependency. Flink is currently mainly used for streaming, so let's not talk about hive. For streaming jobs, first of all, the jobs in my mind is (related to connectors): - ETL jobs: Kafka -> Kafka - Join jobs: Kafka -> DimJDBC -> Kafka - Aggregation jobs: Kafka -> JDBCSink So Kafka and JDBC are probably the most commonly used. Of course, also includes CSV, JSON's formats. So when we provide such a fat distribution: - With CSV, JSON. - With flink-kafka-universal and kafka dependencies. - With flink-jdbc. Using this fat distribution, most users can run their jobs well. (jdbc driver jar required, but this is very natural to do) Can these dependencies lead to kinds of conflicts? Only Kafka may have conflicts, but if our goal is to use kafka-universal to support all Kafka versions, it is hopeful to target the vast majority of users. We don't want to plug all jars into the fat distribution. Only need less conflict and common. of course, it is a matter of consideration to put which jar into fat distribution. We have the opportunity to facilitate the majority of users, but also left opportunities for customization. Best, Jingsong Lee On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:09 PM Jark Wu wrote: Hi, I think we should first reach an consensus on "what problem do we want to solve?" (1) improve first experience? or (2) improve production experience? As far as I can see, with the above discussion, I think what we want to solve is the "first experience". And I think the slim jar is still the best distribution for production, because it's easier to assembling jars than excluding jars and can avoid potential class conflicts. If we want to improve "first experience", I think it make sense to have a fat distribution to give users a more smooth first experience. But I would like to call it "playground distribution" or something like that to explicitly differ from the "slim production-purpose distribution". The "playground distribution" can contains some widely used jars, like universal-kafka-sql-connector, elasticsearch7-sql-connector, avro, json, csv, etc.. Even we can provide a playground docker which may contain the fat distribution, python3, and hive. Best, Jark On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 21:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: I don't see a lot of value in having multiple distributions. The simple reality is that no fat distribution we could provide would satisfy all use-cases, so why even try. If users commonly run into issues for certain jars, then maybe those should be added to the current distribution. Personally though I still believe we should only distribute a slim version. I'd rather have users always add required jars to the distribution than only when they go outside our "expected" use-cases. Then we might finally address this issue properly, i.e., tooling to assemble custom distributions and/or better error messages if Flink-provided extensions
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi all, Regarding slim and fat distributions, I think different kinds of jobs may prefer different type of distribution: For DataStream job, I think we may not like fat distribution containing connectors because user would always need to depend on the connector in user code, it is easy to include the connector jar in the user lib. Less jar in lib means less class conflicts and problems. For SQL job, I think we are trying to encourage user to user pure sql(DDL + DML) to construct their job, In order to improve user experience, It may be important for flink, not only providing as many connector jar in distribution as possible especially the connector and format we have well documented, but also providing an mechanism to load connectors according to the DDLs, So I think it could be good to place connector/format jars in some dir like opt/connector which would not affect jobs by default, and introduce a mechanism of dynamic discovery for SQL. Best, Wenlong On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 22:46, Jingsong Li wrote: > Hi, > > I am thinking both "improve first experience" and "improve production > experience". > > I'm thinking about what's the common mode of Flink? > Streaming job use Kafka? Batch job use Hive? > > Hive 1.2.1 dependencies can be compatible with most of Hive server > versions. So Spark and Presto have built-in Hive 1.2.1 dependency. > Flink is currently mainly used for streaming, so let's not talk about hive. > > For streaming jobs, first of all, the jobs in my mind is (related to > connectors): > - ETL jobs: Kafka -> Kafka > - Join jobs: Kafka -> DimJDBC -> Kafka > - Aggregation jobs: Kafka -> JDBCSink > So Kafka and JDBC are probably the most commonly used. Of course, also > includes CSV, JSON's formats. > So when we provide such a fat distribution: > - With CSV, JSON. > - With flink-kafka-universal and kafka dependencies. > - With flink-jdbc. > Using this fat distribution, most users can run their jobs well. (jdbc > driver jar required, but this is very natural to do) > Can these dependencies lead to kinds of conflicts? Only Kafka may have > conflicts, but if our goal is to use kafka-universal to support all Kafka > versions, it is hopeful to target the vast majority of users. > > We don't want to plug all jars into the fat distribution. Only need less > conflict and common. of course, it is a matter of consideration to put > which jar into fat distribution. > We have the opportunity to facilitate the majority of users, but also left > opportunities for customization. > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:09 PM Jark Wu wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I think we should first reach an consensus on "what problem do we want to > > solve?" > > (1) improve first experience? or (2) improve production experience? > > > > As far as I can see, with the above discussion, I think what we want to > > solve is the "first experience". > > And I think the slim jar is still the best distribution for production, > > because it's easier to assembling jars > > than excluding jars and can avoid potential class conflicts. > > > > If we want to improve "first experience", I think it make sense to have a > > fat distribution to give users a more smooth first experience. > > But I would like to call it "playground distribution" or something like > > that to explicitly differ from the "slim production-purpose > distribution". > > The "playground distribution" can contains some widely used jars, like > > universal-kafka-sql-connector, elasticsearch7-sql-connector, avro, json, > > csv, etc.. > > Even we can provide a playground docker which may contain the fat > > distribution, python3, and hive. > > > > Best, > > Jark > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 21:47, Chesnay Schepler > wrote: > > > > > I don't see a lot of value in having multiple distributions. > > > > > > The simple reality is that no fat distribution we could provide would > > > satisfy all use-cases, so why even try. > > > If users commonly run into issues for certain jars, then maybe those > > > should be added to the current distribution. > > > > > > Personally though I still believe we should only distribute a slim > > > version. I'd rather have users always add required jars to the > > > distribution than only when they go outside our "expected" use-cases. > > > Then we might finally address this issue properly, i.e., tooling to > > > assemble custom distributions and/or better error messages if > > > Flink-provided extensions cannot be found. > > > > > > On 15/04/2020 15:23, Kurt Young wrote: > > > > Regarding to the specific solution, I'm not sure about the "fat" and > > > "slim" > > > > solution though. I get the idea > > > > that we can make the slim one even more lightweight than current > > > > distribution, but what about the "fat" > > > > one? Do you mean that we would package all connectors and formats > into > > > > this? I'm not sure if this is > > > > feasible. For example, we can't put all versions of kafka and hive > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi, I am thinking both "improve first experience" and "improve production experience". I'm thinking about what's the common mode of Flink? Streaming job use Kafka? Batch job use Hive? Hive 1.2.1 dependencies can be compatible with most of Hive server versions. So Spark and Presto have built-in Hive 1.2.1 dependency. Flink is currently mainly used for streaming, so let's not talk about hive. For streaming jobs, first of all, the jobs in my mind is (related to connectors): - ETL jobs: Kafka -> Kafka - Join jobs: Kafka -> DimJDBC -> Kafka - Aggregation jobs: Kafka -> JDBCSink So Kafka and JDBC are probably the most commonly used. Of course, also includes CSV, JSON's formats. So when we provide such a fat distribution: - With CSV, JSON. - With flink-kafka-universal and kafka dependencies. - With flink-jdbc. Using this fat distribution, most users can run their jobs well. (jdbc driver jar required, but this is very natural to do) Can these dependencies lead to kinds of conflicts? Only Kafka may have conflicts, but if our goal is to use kafka-universal to support all Kafka versions, it is hopeful to target the vast majority of users. We don't want to plug all jars into the fat distribution. Only need less conflict and common. of course, it is a matter of consideration to put which jar into fat distribution. We have the opportunity to facilitate the majority of users, but also left opportunities for customization. Best, Jingsong Lee On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:09 PM Jark Wu wrote: > Hi, > > I think we should first reach an consensus on "what problem do we want to > solve?" > (1) improve first experience? or (2) improve production experience? > > As far as I can see, with the above discussion, I think what we want to > solve is the "first experience". > And I think the slim jar is still the best distribution for production, > because it's easier to assembling jars > than excluding jars and can avoid potential class conflicts. > > If we want to improve "first experience", I think it make sense to have a > fat distribution to give users a more smooth first experience. > But I would like to call it "playground distribution" or something like > that to explicitly differ from the "slim production-purpose distribution". > The "playground distribution" can contains some widely used jars, like > universal-kafka-sql-connector, elasticsearch7-sql-connector, avro, json, > csv, etc.. > Even we can provide a playground docker which may contain the fat > distribution, python3, and hive. > > Best, > Jark > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 21:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: > > > I don't see a lot of value in having multiple distributions. > > > > The simple reality is that no fat distribution we could provide would > > satisfy all use-cases, so why even try. > > If users commonly run into issues for certain jars, then maybe those > > should be added to the current distribution. > > > > Personally though I still believe we should only distribute a slim > > version. I'd rather have users always add required jars to the > > distribution than only when they go outside our "expected" use-cases. > > Then we might finally address this issue properly, i.e., tooling to > > assemble custom distributions and/or better error messages if > > Flink-provided extensions cannot be found. > > > > On 15/04/2020 15:23, Kurt Young wrote: > > > Regarding to the specific solution, I'm not sure about the "fat" and > > "slim" > > > solution though. I get the idea > > > that we can make the slim one even more lightweight than current > > > distribution, but what about the "fat" > > > one? Do you mean that we would package all connectors and formats into > > > this? I'm not sure if this is > > > feasible. For example, we can't put all versions of kafka and hive > > > connector jars into lib directory, and > > > we also might need hadoop jars when using filesystem connector to > access > > > data from HDFS. > > > > > > So my guess would be we might hand-pick some of the most frequently > used > > > connectors and formats > > > into our "lib" directory, like kafka, csv, json metioned above, and > still > > > leave some other connectors out of it. > > > If this is the case, then why not we just provide this distribution to > > > user? I'm not sure i get the benefit of > > > providing another super "slim" jar (we have to pay some costs to > provide > > > another suit of distribution). > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Best, > > > Kurt > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:08 PM Jingsong Li > > wrote: > > > > > >> Big +1. > > >> > > >> I like "fat" and "slim". > > >> > > >> For csv and json, like Jark said, they are quite small and don't have > > other > > >> dependencies. They are important to kafka connector, and important > > >> to upcoming file system connector too. > > >> So can we move them to both "fat" and "slim"? They're so important, > and > > >> they're so lightweight. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Jingsong Lee > > >> > > >> On Wed, Apr
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi, I think we should first reach an consensus on "what problem do we want to solve?" (1) improve first experience? or (2) improve production experience? As far as I can see, with the above discussion, I think what we want to solve is the "first experience". And I think the slim jar is still the best distribution for production, because it's easier to assembling jars than excluding jars and can avoid potential class conflicts. If we want to improve "first experience", I think it make sense to have a fat distribution to give users a more smooth first experience. But I would like to call it "playground distribution" or something like that to explicitly differ from the "slim production-purpose distribution". The "playground distribution" can contains some widely used jars, like universal-kafka-sql-connector, elasticsearch7-sql-connector, avro, json, csv, etc.. Even we can provide a playground docker which may contain the fat distribution, python3, and hive. Best, Jark On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 21:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: > I don't see a lot of value in having multiple distributions. > > The simple reality is that no fat distribution we could provide would > satisfy all use-cases, so why even try. > If users commonly run into issues for certain jars, then maybe those > should be added to the current distribution. > > Personally though I still believe we should only distribute a slim > version. I'd rather have users always add required jars to the > distribution than only when they go outside our "expected" use-cases. > Then we might finally address this issue properly, i.e., tooling to > assemble custom distributions and/or better error messages if > Flink-provided extensions cannot be found. > > On 15/04/2020 15:23, Kurt Young wrote: > > Regarding to the specific solution, I'm not sure about the "fat" and > "slim" > > solution though. I get the idea > > that we can make the slim one even more lightweight than current > > distribution, but what about the "fat" > > one? Do you mean that we would package all connectors and formats into > > this? I'm not sure if this is > > feasible. For example, we can't put all versions of kafka and hive > > connector jars into lib directory, and > > we also might need hadoop jars when using filesystem connector to access > > data from HDFS. > > > > So my guess would be we might hand-pick some of the most frequently used > > connectors and formats > > into our "lib" directory, like kafka, csv, json metioned above, and still > > leave some other connectors out of it. > > If this is the case, then why not we just provide this distribution to > > user? I'm not sure i get the benefit of > > providing another super "slim" jar (we have to pay some costs to provide > > another suit of distribution). > > > > What do you think? > > > > Best, > > Kurt > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:08 PM Jingsong Li > wrote: > > > >> Big +1. > >> > >> I like "fat" and "slim". > >> > >> For csv and json, like Jark said, they are quite small and don't have > other > >> dependencies. They are important to kafka connector, and important > >> to upcoming file system connector too. > >> So can we move them to both "fat" and "slim"? They're so important, and > >> they're so lightweight. > >> > >> Best, > >> Jingsong Lee > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:53 PM godfrey he wrote: > >> > >>> Big +1. > >>> This will improve user experience (special for Flink new users). > >>> We answered so many questions about "class not found". > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Godfrey > >>> > >>> Dian Fu 于2020年4月15日周三 下午4:30写道: > >>> > +1 to this proposal. > > Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. > >>> Currently, > after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to > >> manually > copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for > >> the > connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is > >>> very > confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. > > Regards, > Dian > > > 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: > > > > +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step > >> is > > really verbose when I prepare webinars. > > > > At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the > distribution, > > they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. > > > > Best, > > Jark > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > > > >> Hi Aljoscha, > >> > >> Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put > >> these > >> connectors ? opt or lib ? > >> > >> Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > >> > >>> Hi Everyone, > >>> > >>> I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > >>> distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for > >> SQL/Table > API > >>> users that want to use Table connectors which
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
I don't see a lot of value in having multiple distributions. The simple reality is that no fat distribution we could provide would satisfy all use-cases, so why even try. If users commonly run into issues for certain jars, then maybe those should be added to the current distribution. Personally though I still believe we should only distribute a slim version. I'd rather have users always add required jars to the distribution than only when they go outside our "expected" use-cases. Then we might finally address this issue properly, i.e., tooling to assemble custom distributions and/or better error messages if Flink-provided extensions cannot be found. On 15/04/2020 15:23, Kurt Young wrote: Regarding to the specific solution, I'm not sure about the "fat" and "slim" solution though. I get the idea that we can make the slim one even more lightweight than current distribution, but what about the "fat" one? Do you mean that we would package all connectors and formats into this? I'm not sure if this is feasible. For example, we can't put all versions of kafka and hive connector jars into lib directory, and we also might need hadoop jars when using filesystem connector to access data from HDFS. So my guess would be we might hand-pick some of the most frequently used connectors and formats into our "lib" directory, like kafka, csv, json metioned above, and still leave some other connectors out of it. If this is the case, then why not we just provide this distribution to user? I'm not sure i get the benefit of providing another super "slim" jar (we have to pay some costs to provide another suit of distribution). What do you think? Best, Kurt On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:08 PM Jingsong Li wrote: Big +1. I like "fat" and "slim". For csv and json, like Jark said, they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. They are important to kafka connector, and important to upcoming file system connector too. So can we move them to both "fat" and "slim"? They're so important, and they're so lightweight. Best, Jingsong Lee On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:53 PM godfrey he wrote: Big +1. This will improve user experience (special for Flink new users). We answered so many questions about "class not found". Best, Godfrey Dian Fu 于2020年4月15日周三 下午4:30写道: +1 to this proposal. Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. Currently, after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to manually copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for the connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is very confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. Regards, Dian 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step is really verbose when I prepare webinars. At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the distribution, they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. Best, Jark On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: Hi Aljoscha, Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these connectors ? opt or lib ? Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: Hi Everyone, I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table API users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently roughly: - download Flink dist - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration - run SQL client or program - decrypt error message and research the solution - download additional connector jars - program works correctly I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be determined which one) And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink releases (Scala version and Java version). For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar -
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Regarding to the specific solution, I'm not sure about the "fat" and "slim" solution though. I get the idea that we can make the slim one even more lightweight than current distribution, but what about the "fat" one? Do you mean that we would package all connectors and formats into this? I'm not sure if this is feasible. For example, we can't put all versions of kafka and hive connector jars into lib directory, and we also might need hadoop jars when using filesystem connector to access data from HDFS. So my guess would be we might hand-pick some of the most frequently used connectors and formats into our "lib" directory, like kafka, csv, json metioned above, and still leave some other connectors out of it. If this is the case, then why not we just provide this distribution to user? I'm not sure i get the benefit of providing another super "slim" jar (we have to pay some costs to provide another suit of distribution). What do you think? Best, Kurt On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:08 PM Jingsong Li wrote: > Big +1. > > I like "fat" and "slim". > > For csv and json, like Jark said, they are quite small and don't have other > dependencies. They are important to kafka connector, and important > to upcoming file system connector too. > So can we move them to both "fat" and "slim"? They're so important, and > they're so lightweight. > > Best, > Jingsong Lee > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:53 PM godfrey he wrote: > > > Big +1. > > This will improve user experience (special for Flink new users). > > We answered so many questions about "class not found". > > > > Best, > > Godfrey > > > > Dian Fu 于2020年4月15日周三 下午4:30写道: > > > > > +1 to this proposal. > > > > > > Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. > > Currently, > > > after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to > manually > > > copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for > the > > > connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is > > very > > > confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Dian > > > > > > > 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: > > > > > > > > +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step > is > > > > really verbose when I prepare webinars. > > > > > > > > At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the > > > distribution, > > > > they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Jark > > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi Aljoscha, > > > >> > > > >> Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put > these > > > >> connectors ? opt or lib ? > > > >> > > > >> Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > > > >> > > > >>> Hi Everyone, > > > >>> > > > >>> I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > > > >>> distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for > SQL/Table > > > API > > > >>> users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > > > >>> current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is > currently > > > >>> roughly: > > > >>> > > > >>> - download Flink dist > > > >>> - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > > > >>> - run SQL client or program > > > >>> - decrypt error message and research the solution > > > >>> - download additional connector jars > > > >>> - program works correctly > > > >>> > > > >>> I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has > > this > > > >>> as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > > > >>> > > > >>> My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in > > the > > > >>> future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > > > >>> > > > >>> - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > > > >>> - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > > > >>> determined which one) > > > >>> > > > >>> And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > > > >>> releases (Scala version and Java version). > > > >>> > > > >>> For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt > > directory: > > > >>> > > > >>> - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > > > >>> - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > > > >>> -
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Big +1. I like "fat" and "slim". For csv and json, like Jark said, they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. They are important to kafka connector, and important to upcoming file system connector too. So can we move them to both "fat" and "slim"? They're so important, and they're so lightweight. Best, Jingsong Lee On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:53 PM godfrey he wrote: > Big +1. > This will improve user experience (special for Flink new users). > We answered so many questions about "class not found". > > Best, > Godfrey > > Dian Fu 于2020年4月15日周三 下午4:30写道: > > > +1 to this proposal. > > > > Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. > Currently, > > after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to manually > > copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for the > > connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is > very > > confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. > > > > Regards, > > Dian > > > > > 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: > > > > > > +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step is > > > really verbose when I prepare webinars. > > > > > > At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the > > distribution, > > > they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. > > > > > > Best, > > > Jark > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Aljoscha, > > >> > > >> Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these > > >> connectors ? opt or lib ? > > >> > > >> Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > > >> > > >>> Hi Everyone, > > >>> > > >>> I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > > >>> distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table > > API > > >>> users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > > >>> current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently > > >>> roughly: > > >>> > > >>> - download Flink dist > > >>> - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > > >>> - run SQL client or program > > >>> - decrypt error message and research the solution > > >>> - download additional connector jars > > >>> - program works correctly > > >>> > > >>> I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has > this > > >>> as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > > >>> > > >>> My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in > the > > >>> future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > > >>> > > >>> - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > > >>> - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > > >>> determined which one) > > >>> > > >>> And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > > >>> releases (Scala version and Java version). > > >>> > > >>> For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt > directory: > > >>> > > >>> - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > > >>> - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > >>> - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > >>> > > >>> Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we > would > > >>> go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority > of > > >>> the files in opt are probably unused. > > >>> > > >>> What do you think? > > >>> > > >>> Best, > > >>> Aljoscha > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Best Regards > > >> > > >> Jeff Zhang > > >> > > > > > -- Best, Jingsong Lee
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Big +1. This will improve user experience (special for Flink new users). We answered so many questions about "class not found". Best, Godfrey Dian Fu 于2020年4月15日周三 下午4:30写道: > +1 to this proposal. > > Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. Currently, > after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to manually > copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for the > connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is very > confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. > > Regards, > Dian > > > 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: > > > > +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step is > > really verbose when I prepare webinars. > > > > At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the > distribution, > > they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. > > > > Best, > > Jark > > > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > > > >> Hi Aljoscha, > >> > >> Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these > >> connectors ? opt or lib ? > >> > >> Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > >> > >>> Hi Everyone, > >>> > >>> I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > >>> distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table > API > >>> users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > >>> current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently > >>> roughly: > >>> > >>> - download Flink dist > >>> - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > >>> - run SQL client or program > >>> - decrypt error message and research the solution > >>> - download additional connector jars > >>> - program works correctly > >>> > >>> I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this > >>> as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > >>> > >>> My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the > >>> future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > >>> > >>> - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > >>> - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > >>> determined which one) > >>> > >>> And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > >>> releases (Scala version and Java version). > >>> > >>> For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: > >>> > >>> - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > >>> - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar > >>> - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > >>> > >>> Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we would > >>> go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority of > >>> the files in opt are probably unused. > >>> > >>> What do you think? > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Aljoscha > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards > >> > >> Jeff Zhang > >> > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 to this proposal. Missing connector jars is also a big problem for PyFlink users. Currently, after a Python user has installed PyFlink using `pip`, he has to manually copy the connector fat jars to the PyFlink installation directory for the connectors to be used if he wants to run jobs locally. This process is very confuse for users and affects the experience a lot. Regards, Dian > 在 2020年4月15日,下午3:51,Jark Wu 写道: > > +1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step is > really verbose when I prepare webinars. > > At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the distribution, > they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. > > Best, > Jark > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > >> Hi Aljoscha, >> >> Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these >> connectors ? opt or lib ? >> >> Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: >> >>> Hi Everyone, >>> >>> I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink >>> distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table API >>> users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the >>> current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently >>> roughly: >>> >>> - download Flink dist >>> - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration >>> - run SQL client or program >>> - decrypt error message and research the solution >>> - download additional connector jars >>> - program works correctly >>> >>> I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this >>> as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. >>> >>> My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the >>> future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): >>> >>> - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution >>> - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be >>> determined which one) >>> >>> And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink >>> releases (Scala version and Java version). >>> >>> For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: >>> >>> - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar >>> - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar >>> - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar >>> >>> Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we would >>> go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority of >>> the files in opt are probably unused. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Best, >>> Aljoscha >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Best Regards >> >> Jeff Zhang >>
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
+1 to the proposal. I also found the "download additional jar" step is really verbose when I prepare webinars. At least, I think the flink-csv and flink-json should in the distribution, they are quite small and don't have other dependencies. Best, Jark On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 15:44, Jeff Zhang wrote: > Hi Aljoscha, > > Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these > connectors ? opt or lib ? > > Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > > distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table API > > users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > > current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently > > roughly: > > > > - download Flink dist > > - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > > - run SQL client or program > > - decrypt error message and research the solution > > - download additional connector jars > > - program works correctly > > > > I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this > > as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > > > > My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the > > future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > > > > - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > > - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > > determined which one) > > > > And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > > releases (Scala version and Java version). > > > > For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: > > > > - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > > - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar > > - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > > > Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we would > > go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority of > > the files in opt are probably unused. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Best, > > Aljoscha > > > > > > -- > Best Regards > > Jeff Zhang >
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Hi Aljoscha, Big +1 for the fat flink distribution, where do you plan to put these connectors ? opt or lib ? Aljoscha Krettek 于2020年4月15日周三 下午3:30写道: > Hi Everyone, > > I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table API > users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently > roughly: > > - download Flink dist > - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > - run SQL client or program > - decrypt error message and research the solution > - download additional connector jars > - program works correctly > > I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this > as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > > My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the > future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > > - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > determined which one) > > And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > releases (Scala version and Java version). > > For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: > > - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we would > go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority of > the files in opt are probably unused. > > What do you think? > > Best, > Aljoscha > > -- Best Regards Jeff Zhang
Re: [DISCUSS] Releasing "fat" and "slim" Flink distributions
Big +1 from my side. >From my experience, missing connector & format jar is the TOP 1 problem which SQL users will probably run into. Similar questions raised in Flink's Dingtalk group almost every 1 or 2 days. And I have personally answered dozens of such question. Sometimes it's still not enough for users to download the jars and put it in lib directory, they also have to restart their Flink cluster, which is not obvious and the situation will look like very tricky. Best, Kurt On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 3:30 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I'd like to discuss about releasing a more full-featured Flink > distribution. The motivation is that there is friction for SQL/Table API > users that want to use Table connectors which are not there in the > current Flink Distribution. For these users the workflow is currently > roughly: > > - download Flink dist > - configure csv/Kafka/json connectors per configuration > - run SQL client or program > - decrypt error message and research the solution > - download additional connector jars > - program works correctly > > I realize that this can be made to work but if every SQL user has this > as their first experience that doesn't seem good to me. > > My proposal is to provide two versions of the Flink Distribution in the > future: "fat" and "slim" (names to be discussed): > > - slim would be even trimmer than todays distribution > - fat would contain a lot of convenience connectors (yet to be > determined which one) > > And yes, I realize that there are already more dimensions of Flink > releases (Scala version and Java version). > > For background, our current Flink dist has these in the opt directory: > > - flink-azure-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-cep-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-cep_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-gelly-scala_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-gelly_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-datadog-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-graphite-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-influxdb-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-prometheus-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-slf4j-1.10.0.jar > - flink-metrics-statsd-1.10.0.jar > - flink-oss-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-python_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-queryable-state-runtime_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-s3-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > - flink-s3-fs-presto-1.10.0.jar > - flink-shaded-netty-tcnative-dynamic-2.0.25.Final-9.0.jar > - flink-sql-client_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-state-processor-api_2.12-1.10.0.jar > - flink-swift-fs-hadoop-1.10.0.jar > > Current Flink dist is 267M. If we removed everything from opt we would > go down to 126M. I would reccomend this, because the large majority of > the files in opt are probably unused. > > What do you think? > > Best, > Aljoscha > >