OK, as recommended by Fabian, I explain why I like Relational better =) The concept of Relational suggest the concept of querying data based on the relationship of different sources and the predicates/ filters attached to them.
Or we could go more like keyword name such as "REMOQ" which stands for Relational Model Query =P This way is in the same spirit as Gelly as the name of the new graph modiule. - Henry On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I like the Relation or Relational. So maybe we could use DataRelation > as the abstraction? > > - Henry > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I am also more in favor of Rel and Relation, but DataTable nicely follows >> the terms DataSet and DataStream. >> On Mar 16, 2015 4:58 PM, "Aljoscha Krettek" <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> I like Relation or Rel, is shorter. >>> On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" <reckone...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > +1 for DataTable >>> > >>> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > +1 for DataTable >>> > > >>> > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi < >>> > balassi.mar...@gmail.com >>> > > > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > +1 for Max's suggestion. >>> > > > >>> > > > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximilian Michels < >>> m...@apache.org> >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks for starting the discussion. We should definitely not keep >>> > > > > > flink-expressions. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > I'm in favor of DataTable for the DataSet abstraction equivalent. >>> > For >>> > > > > > consistency, the package name should then be flink-table. At >>> first >>> > > > > > sight, the name seems kind of plain but I think it is quite >>> > intuitive >>> > > > > > because the API enables you to work in a SQL like fashion. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > +1 >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I think this is a very good suggestion. :-) >>> > > > > >>> > > > > (There is an associated issue, we shouldn't forget to close: >>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1623) >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>>
