But why DataTable? What other kind of Table could it be, CarTable? :D
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Alexander Alexandrov <alexander.s.alexand...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for DataTable as core abstraction name and "flink-table" or something > similar as the package name. > > 2015-03-25 11:54 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>: > >> I also prefer Relation. So what should we do? Doesn't really look like >> consensus. >> >> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Paris Carbone <par...@kth.se> wrote: >> > Both names look ok but if I had to choose I would go for the Relation >> API. >> > It defines a new DSL in contrast to data types (ie DataSet, DataStream) >> so it doesn’t have to follow the same convention. >> > Plus, it is a single word with sufficient meaning. >> > >> > Paris >> > >> > On 21 Mar 2015, at 17:29, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com<mailto: >> fhue...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > I'm in favor of Relation API because the API operates on a set of tuples >> > with a fixed (flat) schema which is known as relation from relational >> > databases. >> > >> > Everybody who took a database intro class should be familiar with this >> term. >> > On Mar 21, 2015 5:14 PM, "Henry Saputra" <henry.sapu...@gmail.com >> <mailto: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 >> <mailto: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<mailto: >> aljos...@apache.org>> >> > wrote: >> > >> > I like Relation or Rel, is shorter. >> > On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" <reckone...@gmail.com<mailto: >> reckone...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > +1 for DataTable >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org >> <mailto:trohrm...@apache.org>> >> > wrote: >> > >> > +1 for DataTable >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi < >> > balassi.mar...@gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto: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) >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
