Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210
---
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 feature is enabl
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-76408746
If there are no objections, I will merge this once Travis passes.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as wel
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-76385275
I moved the `writeInto(ByteBuf buf)` method to the subclasses of
`AbstractID` used by `NettyMessage`. This is the only context where the method
is being used and the subclasse
Github user StephanEwen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-76223031
Let us not move netty to flink-core. Let us rather pull that method out of
the AbstractID, or, not use AbstractID at in your code, but the Java UUID.
---
If your proj
Github user uce commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r25429114
--- Diff: flink-core/pom.xml ---
@@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ under the License.
0.5.1
+
--- End diff --
Github user rmetzger commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r25426882
--- Diff: flink-core/pom.xml ---
@@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ under the License.
0.5.1
+
--- End diff -
Github user mxm commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r25426681
--- Diff: flink-core/pom.xml ---
@@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ under the License.
0.5.1
+
--- End diff --
Github user rmetzger commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r25426145
--- Diff: flink-core/pom.xml ---
@@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ under the License.
0.5.1
+
--- End diff -
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-76151146
I squashed the commits and rebased to the current master. Any objections
against merging this?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user StephanEwen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-71726730
@zentol You are right, for the time being, that this results in parts in
repeated execution. While not totally unavoidable in all cases, the code going
in soon about
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-71689597
Looks like this is now ready to merge.
@zentol I understand your concern. However, I think that it is much easier
to execute in this way. Most of the times, the user
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-70718732
I've implemented count and collect in the Scala API. There is still a
problem with the `ListAccumulator` for non-primitive Objects (e.g. not Integer
or Long) probably due to O
Github user mxm commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23176867
--- Diff:
flink-runtime/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/AbstractIDTest.java ---
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
import static org.junit.Assert.fail;
impor
Github user mxm commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23176327
--- Diff:
flink-runtime/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/AbstractIDTest.java ---
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
import static org.junit.Assert.fail;
impor
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-70534961
I fixed the proposed changes and rebased to the current master. The changes
are only reflected in the Java API and need to be added to the Scala API as
well.
---
If your pro
Github user StephanEwen commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#issuecomment-70258735
With the scheduler and intermediate data set enhancements coming up for 0.9
soon, this is now quite feasible to use. I suggest to merge it once the inline
comments are
Github user StephanEwen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23081185
--- Diff:
flink-runtime/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/AbstractIDTest.java ---
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@
import static org.junit.Assert.fail;
Github user StephanEwen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23081083
--- Diff: flink-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/java/Utils.java ---
@@ -32,4 +38,44 @@ public static String getCallLocationName(int depth) {
Github user StephanEwen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23081023
--- Diff: flink-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/java/DataSet.java
---
@@ -302,7 +308,48 @@ public ExecutionEnvironment getExecutionEnvironment() {
Github user StephanEwen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/210#discussion_r23080920
--- Diff:
flink-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/common/accumulators/ListAccumulator.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apac
20 matches
Mail list logo
