Hi, we have some bug fixes queued up. So a 0.8.1 bug fix release should be expected in the upcoming weeks.
Cheers, Aljoscha On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Arvid Heise <arvid.he...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, patch indeed worked for my workflow. Thank you very much. > > Any idea when this patch will be in a non-snapshot? > > Best, > > Arvid > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Arvid Heise <arvid.he...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Sorry building the 0.9 branch took longer than expected. I will follow >> that up on Monday. >> >> Alternatively I would be grateful for a 0.8.0 patch ;) >> >> Best, >> >> Arvid >> >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Arvid, >>> I have a fix that I hope fixes your problem: >>> https://github.com/aljoscha/flink/tree/serializer-factories-fix >>> >>> Could you try building it and running your example? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Aljoscha >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> > We have a bit of a divide in how we handle TypeSerializer and >>> > TypeComparator: TypeSerializer does not handle duplication but relies >>> > on outside code (RuntimeStatefulSerializerFactory) to perform the >>> > duplication. TypeComparator does duplication itself. There is also the >>> > RuntimeComparatorFactory. This, however, does not perform duplication >>> > but simply hands out the same TypeComparator instance multiple times. >>> > With comparators, the user of the comparator is responsible for >>> > calling duplicate() on the comparator. >>> > >>> > I started work on a branch where I add a duplicate() method to >>> > TypeSerializer that simply return itself for stateless serializers and >>> > does a deep copy if it is stateful. The TypeSerializers no longer have >>> > method isStateful() and I replaced the two serializer factories by one >>> > factory that always returns a "duplicate" of the serializer it holds. >>> > >>> > I think we should consolidate the two approaches. So either let the >>> > factories handle all the duplication or let the user of the >>> > comparator/serializer always handle duplication. I think the former is >>> > better, since the latter makes it very easy to forget to duplicate. >>> > >>> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >> Maybe we can get rid of the serializer factories altogether. We could >>> >> enhance the Serializers with a method duplicate() that does nothing >>> >> for stateless serializers and does a deep copy for stateful >>> >> serializers. This would also consolidate all the knowledge about >>> >> stateful/stateless in one place. >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Aljoscha Krettek < >>> aljos...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Of course it doesn't work. The ClassLoader is declared transient in >>> >>> the serializer factory, so it is Null once the factory has been >>> >>> serialized/deserialized once. I open a Jira issue: >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1463 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for reporting this, Arvid. I remember that we saw something >>> similar >>> >>>> a while back. I will take a look at this later today (I am in PST >>> zone >>> >>>> now), can hopefully fix this. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Greetings, >>> >>>> Stephan >>> >> >>
