After email communication between me and the author of the warehouse, he has agreed to donate to Apache Flink and participate in the design of the solution.
@Martlin @Leonard Yes, it can be said that for clickhouse's connector solution [1] we still refer to part of the code and implementation of the existing clickhouse connector [2]. To be precise, we should replace some outdated implementations. During this process, the author and I hope to make the following improvements based on the current warehouse after synchronizing information via email: ● ClickHouse JDBC is updated to the latest (0.4.6[3] is stable and available as of the email deadline) ● Support bool type, delete statement, grpc, tcp ● Implement new Clickhouse Sink Api (to be confirmed) [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/%5BDRAFT%5D+FLIP-202 %3A+Introduce+ClickHouse+Connector [2] https://github.com/itinycheng/flink-connector-clickhouse [3] https://github.com/ClickHouse/clickhouse-java/releases Martijn Visser <martijnvis...@apache.org> 于2023年9月20日周三 21:20写道： > Hi ConradJam, > > The FLIP still references the unofficial "flink-clickhouse-connector" > which I don't really understand: you want to build a new > implementation for this connector, right? > > Best regards, > > Martijn > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:12 PM ConradJam <jam.gz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Does anyone else have an opinion on this part? If not I will start > > voting.Comment collection will be open again > -- Best ConradJam
