Part of the reason for my question is this: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1967. Especially my latest comment there. If we want this, I think we have to overhaul the windowing system anyways and then it doesn't make sense to explore complicated workarounds for the current system.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are simple ways of implementing it in a non-distributed or > inconsistent fashion. > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:55 AM Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > >> This already sounds awfully complicated. Is there no other way to >> implement the delta windows? >> >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi Ufuk, >> > >> > In the concrete use case I have in mind I only want to send events to >> > another subtask of the same task vertex. >> > >> > Specifically: if we want to do distributed delta based windows we need to >> > send after every trigger the element that has triggered the current >> window. >> > So practically I want to broadcast some event regularly to all subtasks >> of >> > the same operator. >> > >> > In this case the operators would wait until they receive this event so we >> > need to make sure that this event sending is not blocked by the actual >> > records. >> > >> > Gyula >> > >> > On Tuesday, June 2, 2015, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> On 02 Jun 2015, at 22:45, Gyula Fóra <gyf...@apache.org <javascript:;>> >> >> wrote: >> >> > I am wondering, what is the suggested way to send some events >> directly to >> >> > another parallel instance in a flink job? For example from one mapper >> to >> >> > another mapper (of the same operator). >> >> > >> >> > Do we have any internal support for this? The first thing that we >> thought >> >> > of is iterations but that is clearly an overkill. >> >> >> >> There is no support for this at the moment. Any parallel instance? Or a >> >> subtask instance of the same task? >> >> >> >> Can you provide more input on the use case? It is certainly possible to >> >> add support for this. >> >> >> >> If the events don't need to be inline with the records, we can easily >> >> setup the TaskEventDispatcher as a separate actor (or extend the task >> >> manager) to process both backwards flowing events and in general any >> events >> >> that don't need to be inline with the records. The task deployment >> >> descriptors need to be extended with the extra parallel instance >> >> information. >> >> >> >> – Ufuk >>
