Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Closed.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @mushketyk could you close this PR?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @mushketyk ! Thanks a lot for the reply!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @kl0u
Sorry for the long delay. I don't have any free time to allocate to
contribute to Flink, so I don't mind if @dawidwys works on this.
---
If your project is set up for it, you
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @mushketyk are you still working on this issue?
In not, @dawidwys would also like to work on this issue.
Please let me know what you think.
---
If your project is set up for it, you
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Sounds good! Also you can think on the API changes I propose. I think they
simplify the user-facing commands and remove some long and not so elegant
if-loops that check the type of quantifier.
---
If
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Got it Let me check how it works with the current code and I'll come back
with a proposed solution.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
I was talking about a pattern like `begin().oneOrMany().where("a")`. So
that you just expect as many consecutive `a`'s as possible.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Let's see if I understand correctly the test case you are describing. Do
you mean that a pattern like:
```java
begin().oneOrMany().where("a")
.next().optional().where("b")
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Well for iii), the idea behind the new type of state is that the `NFA` will
see one `PotentiallyFinal` element, but it will continue receiving, until the
first non-eligible element. So if the pattern
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @kl0u
Thank you for your suggestions.
I don't have a concrete solution yet, but I can try to fill the gaps in
testing and see if I can come up with a better solution.
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @mushketyk ! Thanks a lot!
The problem is in the `NFACompiler` and more specifically the way the
pattern is compiled. I have not come up with a concrete solution yet but I
would say that:
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @kl0u,
Yes you are right. It should work fine without the "end" event and if it
does not work it is a bug.
I'll take a look at this in the next few days, rebase the PR and address
Github user kl0u commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @mushketyk ! Yes. In this case we would expect to have everything apart
from the "end" event in the result, right?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Hi @kl0u,
Sorry for misunderstanding, I still don't understand the problem :)
Let's select a test and go through it. For example in the test
`testOneOrMoreCEPPattern` from
Github user chermenin commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
@mushketyk It seems needed to rebase this PR.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user tttMelody commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
it's an important feature,esper and siddhi all support this.hope to relase
as soon as possible
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
Could someone please take a look at this PR? It has been here without a
review for more than 2 weeks.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
@tillrohrmann , could you please take a look at this PR?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user mushketyk commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2361
I've added support for zeroToMany, oneToMany, optional and count
quantifiers in CEP patterns.
I had to change logic of NFACompiler quite a bit to accommodate new
---
If your project is set
20 matches
Mail list logo
