+1 to RAW, if there's no better candidate comes up. Best, Kurt
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 9:25 PM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > I would also avoid `UNKNOWN` because of the mentioned reasons. > > I'm fine with `RAW`. I will wait another day or two until I conclude the > discussion. > > Thanks, > Timo > > > On 21.10.19 12:23, Jark Wu wrote: > > I also think `UNKNOWN` is not suitable here. > > Because we already have `UNKNOWN` value in SQL, i.e. the three-valued > logic > > (TRUE, FALSE, UNKNOWN) of BOOLEAN type. > > It will confuse users here, what's the relationship between them. > > > > Best, > > Jark > > > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 at 17:53, Paul Lam <paullin3...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> IMHO, `UNKNOWN` does not fully reflects the situation here, because the > >> types are > >> actually “known” to users, and users just want to leave them out of > Flink > >> type system. > >> > >> +1 for `RAW`, for it's more intuitive than `OPAQUE`. > >> > >> Best, > >> Paul Lam > >> > >>> 在 2019年10月21日，16:43，Kurt Young <ykt...@gmail.com> 写道： > >>> > >>> OPAQUE seems to be a little bit advanced to a lot non-english > >>> speakers (including me). I think Xuefu raised a good alternative: > >>> UNKNOWN. What do you think about it? > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> Kurt > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 3:49 PM Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I prefer OPAQUE compared to ANY because any is often the root object > in > >> an > >>>> object hierarchy and would indicate to users the wrong thing. > >>>> > >>>> Aljoscha > >>>> > >>>>> On 18. Oct 2019, at 18:41, Xuefu Z <usxu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks to Timo for bringing up an interesting topic. > >>>>> > >>>>> Personally, "OPAQUE" doesn't seem very intuitive with respect to > types. > >>>> (It > >>>>> suits pretty well to glasses, thought. :)) Anyway, could we just use > >>>>> "UNKNOWN", which is more explicit and true reflects its nature? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Xuefu > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 7:51 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>>>>> Hi everyone, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Stephan pointed out that our naming of a generic/blackbox/opaque > type > >> in > >>>>>> SQL might be not intuitive for users. As the term ANY rather > >> describes a > >>>>>> "super-class of all types" which is not the case in our type system. > >> Our > >>>>>> current ANY type stands for a type that is just a blackbox within > SQL, > >>>>>> serialized by some custom serializer, that can only be modified > within > >>>>>> UDFs. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I also gathered feedback from a training instructor and native > English > >>>>>> speaker (David in CC) where I received the following: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "The way I’m thinking about this is this: there’s a concept here > that > >>>>>> people have to become aware of, which is that Flink SQL is able to > >>>>>> operate generically on opaquely typed things — and folks need to be > >> able > >>>>>> to connect what they see in code examples, etc. with this concept > >> (which > >>>>>> they may be unaware of initially). > >>>>>> I feel like ANY misses the mark a little bit, but isn’t particularly > >>>>>> bad. I do worry that it may cause some confusion about its purpose > and > >>>>>> power. I think OPAQUE would more clearly express what’s going on." > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also resources like Wikipedia [1] show that this terminology is > >> common: > >>>>>> "a data type whose concrete data structure is not defined [...] its > >>>>>> values can only be manipulated by calling subroutines that have > access > >>>>>> to the missing information" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I would therefore vote for refactoring the type name because it is > not > >>>>>> used much yet. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Implications are: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - a new parser keyword "OPAQUE" and changed SQL parser > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - changes for logical type root, logical type visitors, and their > >> usages > >>>>>> What do you think? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Timo > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_data_type > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Xuefu Zhang > >>>>> > >>>>> "In Honey We Trust!" > >>>> > >> > >
