Whats causing me the biggest headache here is that I don't see an end on all these "state interface" reworks. I think this is now the third big change to the interface. It is a horrible user experience to rework your old code with each new Flink release.
I understand that there are always ways to improve interfaces, and I'm sure Flink has many that we can improve. But there are (in my opinion) more important things than reworking the interfaces every second week ... for example that the functionality they are providing is actually working and well tested. On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 01 Jul 2015, at 10:57, Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > Thanks for the feedback guys: > > > > @Max: You are right, this is not top priority to changes, I was just > > mocking up some alternatives to try to make the state usage even simpler > so > > that the user can keep his current implementations and just add 1-2 > > annotations. > > I agree. It's good to cover the "basic" case with a simple solution. :-) > > > @Stephan, Robert: You are right that the checkpointed interface has some > > advantages from that point of view. Maybe a way to go would be to > separate > > this signaling functionality (when the checkpoint is taken and maybe also > > the commits) from the snapshotting itself. One advantage I see there is > > that we would not need to have 3 different interfaces doing pretty much > the > > same thing (OperatorState - needed for partitioned state and different > > backends/out-of-core, Checkpointed - needed for special actions after > > checkpoints, Annotations - checkpointing simple fields natively). > > I also agree with Stephan and Robert that there are other use cases, which > require the interfaces. I cannot judge your proposal at this point though. > I'm eager to hear what the others say who worked on this. > > – Ufuk
