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
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>

Reply via email to