Hi Nicholas, I am not sure I understand your question about renaming. I think the most important member of the current Rule class is the Pattern, the KeySelector and PatternProcessFunction are more auxiliary if you will. That's why, I think, it would be ok to rename Rule to DynamicPatternHolder although it contains more than just a Pattern.
Cheers, Konstantin On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 9:16 AM Nicholas Jiang <nicholasji...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Konstantin, > > Thanks for your feedback. The point that add a timestamp to each rule > that determines the start time from which the rule makes sense to me. At > present, The timestamp is current time at default, so no timestamp field > represents the start time from which the rule. And about the renaming rule, > your suggestion looks good to me and no any new concept introduces. But > does this introduce Rule concept or reuse the Pattern concept for the > DynamicPattern renaming? > > Best, > Nicholas Jiang > > On 2021/12/13 07:45:04 Konstantin Knauf wrote: > > Thanks, Yufeng, for starting this discussion. I think this will be a very > > popular feature. I've seen a lot of users asking for this in the past. > So, > > generally big +1. > > > > I think we should have a rough idea on how to expose this feature in the > > other APIs. > > > > Two ideas: > > > > 1. In order to make this more deterministic in case of reprocessing and > > out-of-orderness, I am wondering if we can add a timestamp to each rule > > that determines the start time from which the rule should be in effect. > > This can be an event or a processing time depending on the > characteristics > > of the pipeline. The timestamp would default to Long.MIN_TIMESTAMP if not > > provided, which means effectively immediately. This could also be a > follow > > up, if you think it will make the implementation too complicated > initially. > > > > 2. I am wondering, if we should name Rule->DynamicPatternHolder or so and > > CEP.rule-> CEP.dynamicPatterns instead (other classes correspondingly)? > > Rule is quite ambiguous and DynamicPattern seems more descriptive to me. > > > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 4:30 AM Nicholas Jiang <nicholasji...@apache.org > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Martijn, > > > > > > IMO, in this FLIP, we only need to introduce the general design of > the > > > Table API/SQL level. As for the design details, you can create a new > FLIP. > > > And do we need to take into account the support for Batch mode if you > > > expand the MATCH_RECOGNIZE function? About the dynamic rule engine > design, > > > do you have any comments? This core of the FLIP is about the multiple > rule > > > and dynamic rule changing mechanism. > > > > > > Best, > > > Nicholas Jiang > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Konstantin Knauf > > > > https://twitter.com/snntrable > > > > https://github.com/knaufk > > > -- Konstantin Knauf https://twitter.com/snntrable https://github.com/knaufk
