Hi Timo, My expectation is that we should at least think of what and how it should work for SQL/Table API, especially since that's our recommendation for new users.That doesn't mean that everything needs to be implemented at the same time.
My worry is that in order for a SQL / Table implementation to work, you would need to introduce changes that could be avoided upfront. Best regards, Martijn Op vr 10 dec. 2021 om 14:38 schreef Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> > Hi all, > > I don't think it is easy to integrate this kind of functionality in > SQL/Table API. The CEP library can be more powerful than > MATCH_RECOGNIZE. I haven't taken a look at the FLIP yet. But I would be > fine to leave Table API/SQL up for future work and a separate FLIP. > > Regards, > Timo > > > On 10.12.21 13:44, Ingo Bürk wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I agree with Martijn on this. The lack of parity across major APIs is a > > frequent cause of user questions and friction, forcing users to switch > > between APIs etc. I would therefore also suggest expanding the scope to > > cover Table API + SQL as well. In general we should probably split FLIPs > > on a functional level and not between APIs. > > > > > > Best > > > > Ingo > > > > On 10.12.21 13:24, Martijn Visser wrote: > >> Apologies, I do see SQL mentioned at the bottom for new rules, but I > >> don't > >> think it's a good idea to have these changes only for the DataStream > >> API in > >> the beginning. This would increase sparsity in Flink, which we should > >> avoid. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> > >> Martijn > >> > >> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 at 13:19, Martijn Visser <mart...@ververica.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Yunfeng, > >>> > >>> Thanks for creating the FLIP. I don't see any mention of SQL's > >>> MATCH_RECOGNIZE implementation in the FLIP and I think that any > >>> change in > >>> CEP should be available to both DataStream and SQL/Table API users. > >>> Can you > >>> elaborate on that? > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> > >>> Martijn > >>> > >>> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 at 12:16, Yunfeng Zhou < > flink.zhouyunf...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi all， > >>>> > >>>> I'm opening this thread to propose the design to support multiple > >>>> rule & > >>>> dynamic rule changing in the Flink-CEP project, as described in > >>>> FLIP-200 > >>>> [1] > >>>> . > >>>> > >>>> Currently Flink CEP only supports having a single pattern inside a > >>>> CepOperator and does not support changing the pattern dynamically. In > >>>> order > >>>> to reduce resource consumption and to experience shorter downtime > >>>> during > >>>> pattern updates, there is a growing need in the production environment > >>>> that > >>>> expects CEP to support having multiple patterns in one operator and to > >>>> support dynamically changing them. Therefore I propose to add certain > >>>> infrastructure as described in FLIP-200 to support these > >>>> functionalities. > >>>> > >>>> Please feel free to reply to this email thread. Looking forward to > your > >>>> feedback! > >>>> > >>>> [1] > >>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=195730308 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> Yunfeng > >>>> > > > > -- Martijn Visser | Product Manager mart...@ververica.com <https://www.ververica.com/> Follow us @VervericaData -- Join Flink Forward <https://flink-forward.org/> - The Apache Flink Conference Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time
