Hi Liu, The voting thread has been open for a long time. We may want to start a new voting thread. WDYT?
Best, Xuannan On Sat, Jan 6, 2024 at 1:51 AM Lu Niu <qqib...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you Dong and Xuannan! > > Yes. We can take on this task. Any help during bootstrapping would be greatly > appreciated! I realize there is already a voting thread "[VOTE] FLIP-329: Add > operator attribute to specify support for object-reuse". What else do we need? > > Best > Lu > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 12:46 AM Xuannan Su <suxuanna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Lu, >> >> I believe this feature is very useful. However, I currently lack the >> capacity to work on it in the near future. I think it would be great >> if you could take on the task. I am willing to offer assistance if >> there are any questions about the FLIP, or to review the PR if needed. >> >> Please let me know if you are interested in taking over this task. And >> also think that we should start the voting thread if no future >> comments on this FLIP. >> >> Best, >> Xuannan >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 2:23 PM Dong Lin <lindon...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi Lu, >> > >> > I am not actively working on Flink and this JIRA recently. If Xuannan does >> > not plan to work on this anytime soon, I personally think it will be great >> > if you can help work on this FLIP. Maybe we can start the voting thread if >> > there is no further comment on this FLIP. >> > >> > Xuannan, what do you think? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Dong >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 2:03 AM Lu Niu <qqib...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Is this still under active development? I notice >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-32476 is labeled as >> >> deprioritized. If this is the case, would it be acceptable for us to take >> >> on the task? >> >> >> >> Best >> >> Lu >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 4:26 PM Ken Krugler <kkrugler_li...@transpac.com> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Dong, >> >>> >> >>> Sorry for not seeing this initially. I did have one question about the >> >>> description of the issue in the FLIP: >> >>> >> >>> > However, in cases where the upstream and downstream operators do not >> >>> > store or access references to the input or output records, this >> >>> > deep-copy overhead becomes unnecessary >> >>> >> >>> I was interested in getting clarification as to what you meant by “or >> >>> access references…”, to see if it covered this situation: >> >>> >> >>> StreamX —forward--> operator1 >> >>> StreamX —forward--> operator2 >> >>> >> >>> If operator1 modifies the record, and object re-use is enabled, then >> >>> operator2 will see the modified version, right? >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> >> >>> — Ken >> >>> >> >>> > On Jul 2, 2023, at 7:24 PM, Xuannan Su <suxuanna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> > Hi all, >> >>> > >> >>> > Dong(cc'ed) and I are opening this thread to discuss our proposal to >> >>> > add operator attribute to allow operator to specify support for >> >>> > object-reuse [1]. >> >>> > >> >>> > Currently, the default configuration for pipeline.object-reuse is set >> >>> > to false to avoid data corruption, which can result in suboptimal >> >>> > performance. We propose adding APIs that operators can utilize to >> >>> > inform the Flink runtime whether it is safe to reuse the emitted >> >>> > records. This enhancement would enable Flink to maximize its >> >>> > performance using the default configuration. >> >>> > >> >>> > Please refer to the FLIP document for more details about the proposed >> >>> > design and implementation. We welcome any feedback and opinions on >> >>> > this proposal. >> >>> > >> >>> > Best regards, >> >>> > >> >>> > Dong and Xuannan >> >>> > >> >>> > [1] >> >>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=255073749 >> >>> >> >>> -------------------------- >> >>> Ken Krugler >> >>> http://www.scaleunlimited.com >> >>> Custom big data solutions >> >>> Flink & Pinot >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>
