Hi Shengkai, Thanks for your effort with the example, this looks promising. I like the fact that users wouldn't need to sweat with complex create table statements.
Couple of questions: * Do I understand correctly that this is 2.x only feature and we can't backport it to 1.x line? I'm not intended to do any backport, just would like to know the technical constraints. * Is it possible to describe such function to see the column names/types? BR, G On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 3:17 AM Shengkai Fang <fskm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Many thanks for your reminder, Leonard. Here's the link I mentioned[1]. > > Best, > Shengkai > > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26358 > > Leonard Xu <xbjt...@gmail.com> 于2025年3月27日周四 10:05写道： > > > Your link is broken, Shengkai > > > > Best, > > Leonard > > > > > 2025年3月27日 10:01，Shengkai Fang <fskm...@gmail.com> 写道： > > > > > > Hi, All. > > > > > > I write a simple demo to illustrate my idea. Hope this helps. > > > > > > Best, > > > Shengkai > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/compare/master...fsk119:flink:example?expand=1 > > > > > > Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> 于2025年3月26日周三 15:54写道： > > > > > >>> I'm fine with a seperate SQL connector for metadata, so maybe we > could > > >> update the FLIP about our discussion? > > >> > > >> Sorry, I've forgotten this part. Yeah, no matter we choose I'm going > to > > >> update the FLIP. > > >> > > >> G > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 8:51 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi All, > > >>> > > >>> I've also lack of the knowledge of PTF so I've read just the > motivation > > >>> part: > > >>> > > >>> "The SQL 2016 standard introduced a way of defining custom SQL > > operators > > >>> defined by ISO/IEC 19075-7:2021 (Part 7: Polymorphic table > functions). > > >>> ~200 pages define how this new kind of function can consume and > produce > > >>> tables with various execution properties. > > >>> Unfortunately, this part of the standard is not publicly available." > > >>> > > >>> Of course we can take a look at some examples but do we really want > to > > >>> expose state data with this construct > > >>> which is described in ~200 pages and part of the standard is not > > publicly > > >>> available? 🙂 > > >>> I mean the dataset is couple of rows and the use-case is join with > > >> another > > >>> table like with state data. > > >>> If somebody can give advantages I would buy that but from my limited > > >>> understanding this would be an overkill here. > > >>> > > >>> BR, > > >>> G > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 8:28 AM Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Zakelly , Shengkai! > > >>>> > > >>>> I don't know too much about PTFs, it would be interesting to see how > > the > > >>>> usage would look in practice. > > >>>> > > >>>> Do you have some mockup/example in mind how the PTF would look for > > >> example > > >>>> when want to: > > >>>> - Simply display/aggregate whats in the metadata > > >>>> - Join keyed state with some metadata columns > > >>>> > > >>>> Thanks > > >>>> Gyula > > >>>> > > >>>> On Wed, Mar 26, 2025 at 7:33 AM Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi everyone, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm fine with a seperate SQL connector for metadata, so maybe we > > could > > >>>>> update the FLIP about our discussion? And Shengkai provides a PTF > > >>>>> implementation, does that also meet the requirement? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Best, > > >>>>> Zakelly > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 4:47 PM Gabor Somogyi < > > >>>> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi All, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> @Zakelly: Gyula summarised it correctly what I meant so please > treat > > >>>> the > > >>>>>> content as mine. > > >>>>>> As an addition I'm not against to add CLI at all, I'm just stating > > >>>> that > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>> some cases like this, users would like to have > > >>>>>> a self-serving solution where they can provide SQL statements > which > > >>>> can > > >>>>>> trigger alerts automatically. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> My personal opinion is that CLI would be beneficial for several > > >>>> cases. A > > >>>>>> good example is when users want to restart job > > >>>>>> from specific Kafka offsets which are persisted in a savepoint. > For > > >>>> such > > >>>>>> scenario users are more than happy since they > > >>>>>> expect manual intervention with full control. So all in all one > can > > >>>> count > > >>>>>> on my +1 when CLI FLIP would come up... > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>> G > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 8:20 AM Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hi! > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> @Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>> I think what Gabor means is that users want to have predefined > SQL > > >>>>> scripts > > >>>>>>> to perform state analysis tasks to debug/identify problems. > > >>>>>>> Such as write a SQL script that joins the metadata table with the > > >>>> state > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>> do some analytics on it. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> If we have a meta table then the SQL script that can do this is > > >> fixed > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>>> users can trigger this on demand by simply providing a new > > >> savepoint > > >>>>> path. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> If we have a different mechanism to extract metadata that is not > > >> SQL > > >>>>>>> native > > >>>>>>> then manual steps need to be executed and a custom SQL script > would > > >>>> need > > >>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>> be written that adds the manually extracted metadata into the > > >> script. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>> Gyula > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 4:32 AM Zakelly Lan < > zakelly....@gmail.com > > >>> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks for your answers! Getting everyone aligned on this topic > > >> is > > >>>>>>>> challenging, but it’s definitely worth the effort since it will > > >>>> help > > >>>>>>>> streamline things moving forward. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> @Gabor are you saying that users are using some scripts to > define > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>> SQL > > >>>>>>>> metadata connector and get the information, right? If so, would > a > > >>>> CLI > > >>>>>>> tool > > >>>>>>>> be more convenient? It's easy to invoke and can get the result > > >>>>> swiftly. > > >>>>>>> And > > >>>>>>>> there should be some other systems to track the checkpoint > > >> lineage > > >>>> and > > >>>>>>>> analyze if there are outliers in metadata (e.g. state size of > one > > >>>>>>> operator) > > >>>>>>>> right? Well, maybe I missed something so please correct me if > I'm > > >>>>> wrong. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I think the overall vision in Flink SQL is to provide a SQL > > >> native > > >>>>>>>>> environment where we can serve complex use-cases like you would > > >>>>> expect > > >>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>> regular database. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> @Gyula Well, this is a good point. From the perspective of > > >>>>> comprehensive > > >>>>>>>> SQL experience, I'd +1 for treating metadata as data. Although I > > >>>> doubt > > >>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>> there is a need for processing metadata, I won't be against a > > >>>> separate > > >>>>>>>> connector. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Regarding the CLI tool, I still think it’s worth implementing. > > >>>> Such a > > >>>>>>> tool > > >>>>>>>> could provide savepoint information before resuming from a > > >>>> savepoint, > > >>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>> would enhance the user experience in CLI-based workflows. It > > >> would > > >>>> be > > >>>>>>> good > > >>>>>>>> if someone could implement this feature. We shouldn’t worry > about > > >>>>>>> whether > > >>>>>>>> this tool might be retired in the future. Regardless of the > > >>>> SQL-based > > >>>>>>>> solution we eventually adopt, this capability will remain > > >> essential > > >>>>> for > > >>>>>>> CLI > > >>>>>>>> users. This is another topic. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>> Zakelly > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 10:37 AM Shengkai Fang < > > >> fskm...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> After reading the doc[1], I think Spark provides a function for > > >>>>> users > > >>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> consume the metadata from the savepoint. In Flink SQL, similar > > >>>>>>>>> functionality is implemented through Polymorphic Table > > >> Functions > > >>>>>>> (PTF) as > > >>>>>>>>> proposed in FLIP-440[2]. Below is a code example[3] > > >> illustrating > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>> concept: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ``` > > >>>>>>>>> public static class ScalarArgsFunction extends > > >>>>>>>>> TestProcessTableFunctionBase { > > >>>>>>>>> public void eval(Integer i, Boolean b) { > > >>>>>>>>> collectObjects(i, b); > > >>>>>>>>> } > > >>>>>>>>> } > > >>>>>>>>> ``` > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> ``` > > >>>>>>>>> INSERT INTO sink SELECT * FROM f(i => 42, b => CAST('TRUE' AS > > >>>>>>> BOOLEAN)) > > >>>>>>>>> `` > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> So we can add a builtin function named `read_state_metadata` to > > >>>> read > > >>>>>>>>> savepoint data. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://docs.databricks.com/aws/en/structured-streaming/read-state?language=SQL > > >>>>>>>>> [2] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=298781093 > > >>>>>>>>> [3] > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-table/flink-table-planner/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/table/planner/plan/nodes/exec/stream/ProcessTableFunctionTestPrograms.java#L140 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> 于2025年3月19日周三 18:37写道： > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi All! > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the answers and concerns from everyone. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On the CLI vs State Metadata Connector/Table question I would > > >>>> also > > >>>>>>> like > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> step back a little and look at the bigger picture. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I think the overall vision in Flink SQL is to provide a SQL > > >>>> native > > >>>>>>>>>> environment where we can serve complex use-cases like you > > >> would > > >>>>>>> expect > > >>>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>> regular database. > > >>>>>>>>>> Most features, developments in the recent years have gone > > >> this > > >>>>> way. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> The State Metadata Table would be a natural and > > >> straightforward > > >>>>> fit > > >>>>>>>> here. > > >>>>>>>>>> So from my side, +1 for that. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> However I could understand if we are not ready to add a new > > >>>>>>>>>> connector/format due to maintenance concerns (and in general > > >>>>> concern > > >>>>>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>> the design). > > >>>>>>>>>> If that's the issue then we should spend more time on the > > >>>> design > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>> get > > >>>>>>>>>> comfortable with the approach and seek feedback from the > > >> wider > > >>>>>>>> community > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I am -1 for the CLI/tooling approach as that will not provide > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> featureset we are looking for that is not already covered by > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>> Java > > >>>>>>>>>> connector. And that approach would come with the same > > >>>> maintenance > > >>>>>>>>>> implications. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Cheers > > >>>>>>>>>> Gyula > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:24 AM Gabor Somogyi < > > >>>>>>>>> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Zaklely, Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Several topics are going on so adding gist answers to them. > > >>>> When > > >>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>> topic > > >>>>>>>>>>> is not touched please highlight it. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Shengkai: I've read through all the previous FLIPs related > > >>>>>>> catalogs > > >>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>> we would like to keep the concepts there > > >>>>>>>>>>> then one-to-one mapping relationship between savepoint and > > >>>>> catalog > > >>>>>>>> is a > > >>>>>>>>>>> reasonable direction. In short I'm happy that > > >>>>>>>>>>> you've highlighted this and agree as a whole. I've written > > >> it > > >>>>> down > > >>>>>>>>>>> previously, just want to double confirm that state catalog > > >> is > > >>>>>>>>>>> essential and planned. When we reach this point then your > > >>>> input > > >>>>> is > > >>>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>> than welcome. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Zakelly: We've tried the CLI and separate library > > >> approaches > > >>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>> users > > >>>>>>>>>>> already and these are not something which is welcome > > >> because > > >>>> of > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> following: > > >>>>>>>>>>> * Users want to have automated tasks and not manual > > >>>> CLI/library > > >>>>>>>> output > > >>>>>>>>>>> parsing. This can be hacked around but our experience is > > >>>>> negative > > >>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>> because it's just brittle. > > >>>>>>>>>>> * From development perspective It's way much bigger effort > > >>>> than > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>> (hard to test, packaging/version handling is and extra > > >> layer > > >>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>> complexity, > > >>>>>>>>>>> external FS authentication is pain for users, expecting > > >> them > > >>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> download > > >>>>>>>>>>> savepoints also) > > >>>>>>>>>>> * Purely personal opinion but if we would find better ways > > >>>> later > > >>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>> retire a CLI is not more lightweight than retire a > > >> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> It would be great if you give some examples on how user > > >>>> could > > >>>>>>>>> leverage > > >>>>>>>>>>> the separate connector to process the metadata. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> The most simplest cases: > > >>>>>>>>>>> * give me the overgroving state uids > > >>>>>>>>>>> * give me the not known (new or renamed) state uids > > >>>>>>>>>>> * give me the state uids where state size drastically > > >> dropped > > >>>>>>> compare > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>> previous savepoint (accidental state loss) > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Since it was mentioned: as a general offtopic teaser, yeah > > >> it > > >>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>> good > > >>>>>>>>>>> to have some sort of checkpoint/savepoint lineage or > > >> however > > >>>> we > > >>>>>>> call > > >>>>>>>>> it. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Since we've not yet reached this point there are no > > >> technical > > >>>>>>>> details, > > >>>>>>>>>> it's > > >>>>>>>>>>> more like a vision. It's a common pattern that > > >>>>>>>>>>> jobs are physically running but somehow the state > > >> processing > > >>>> is > > >>>>>>> stuck > > >>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>> it would be good to add some way to find it out > > >>>> automatically. > > >>>>>>>>>>> The important saying here is automation and not manual > > >>>>> evaluation > > >>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>> handling 10k+ jobs is just not allowing that. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:46 AM Shengkai Fang < > > >>>>> fskm...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, All. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> About State Catalog, I want to share more thoughts about > > >>>> this. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> In the initial design concept, I understood that a > > >>>> savepoint > > >>>>>>> and a > > >>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>> catalog have a one-to-one mapping relationship. Each > > >>>> operator > > >>>>>>>>>> corresponds > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to a database, and the state of each operator is > > >>>> represented > > >>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>> individual > > >>>>>>>>>>>> tables. The rationale behind this design is: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *State Diversity*: An operator may involve multiple types > > >>>> of > > >>>>>>>> states. > > >>>>>>>>>> For > > >>>>>>>>>>>> example, in our VVR design, a "multi-join" operator uses > > >>>> keyed > > >>>>>>>> states > > >>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> two input streams and a broadcast state for the third > > >>>> stream. > > >>>>>>> This > > >>>>>>>>>> makes > > >>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> challenging to represent all states of an operator > > >> within a > > >>>>>>> single > > >>>>>>>>>> table. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Scalability*: Internally, an operator might have > > >> multiple > > >>>>> keyed > > >>>>>>>>> states > > >>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g., value state and list state). However, large list > > >>>> states > > >>>>>>> may > > >>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>> fit > > >>>>>>>>>>>> entirely in memory. To address this, we recommend > > >>>> implementing > > >>>>>>> each > > >>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>> as a separate table. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> To resolve the loosely coupled relationships between > > >>>> operator > > >>>>>>>> states, > > >>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>> propose embedding predefined views within the catalog. > > >>>> These > > >>>>>>> views > > >>>>>>>>>>> simplify > > >>>>>>>>>>>> user understanding of operator implementations and > > >> provide > > >>>> a > > >>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>> intuitive > > >>>>>>>>>>>> perspective. For instance, a join operator may have > > >>>> multiple > > >>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>> implementations (depending on whether the join key > > >> includes > > >>>>>>> unique > > >>>>>>>>>>>> attributes), but users primarily care about the data > > >>>>> associated > > >>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> specific join key across input streams. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Returning to the one-to-one mapping between savepoints > > >> and > > >>>>>>>> catalogs, > > >>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>> aim > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to manage multiple user state catalogs through a catalog > > >>>>> store. > > >>>>>>>> When > > >>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>> user > > >>>>>>>>>>>> triggers a savepoint for a job on the platform: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. The platform sends a REST request to the JobManager. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Simultaneously, it registers a new state catalog in > > >> the > > >>>>>>> catalog > > >>>>>>>>>> store, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> enabling immediate analysis of state data on the > > >> platform. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Deleting a savepoint would also trigger the removal of > > >>>> its > > >>>>>>>>>> associated > > >>>>>>>>>>>> catalog. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> This vision assumes that states are self-describing or > > >>>> that a > > >>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>> metaservice is introduced to analyze savepoint > > >> structures. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> How can users create logic to identify differences > > >>>> between > > >>>>>>>> multiple > > >>>>>>>>>>>> savepoints? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Since savepoints and state catalogs are one-to-one > > >> mapped, > > >>>>> users > > >>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>> query > > >>>>>>>>>>>> metadata via their respective catalogs. For example: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. > > >>>>> `savepoint-${id}`.`system`.`metadata_table`.`<operator-name>` > > >>>>>>>>>> provides > > >>>>>>>>>>>> operator-specific metadata (e.g., state size, type). > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Comparing metadata tables (e.g., schema versions, > > >> state > > >>>>> entry > > >>>>>>>>>> counts) > > >>>>>>>>>>>> across catalogs reveals structural or quantitative > > >>>>> differences. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 3. For deeper analysis, users could write SQL queries to > > >>>>> compare > > >>>>>>>>>> specific > > >>>>>>>>>>>> state partitions or leverage the metaservice to track > > >> state > > >>>>>>>> evolution > > >>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g., added/removed operators, modified state > > >>>>> configurations). > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> If we plan to introduce a state catalog in the future, I > > >>>> would > > >>>>>>> lean > > >>>>>>>>>>> toward > > >>>>>>>>>>>> using metadata tables. If a utility tool can address the > > >>>>>>> challenges > > >>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>> face, could we avoid introducing an additional connector? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> 于2025年3月17日周一 20:25写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Without going into too much detail here are my 2 cents > > >>>>>>> regarding > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual column / catalog metadata / table (connector) > > >>>>>>> discussion > > >>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> State metadata. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> State metadata such as the types of states, their > > >>>>> properties, > > >>>>>>>>> names, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> sizes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> etc are all valuable information that can be used to > > >>>> enrich > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> computations we do on state. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We can either analyze it standalone (such as discover > > >>>>>>> anomalies, > > >>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> large > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> jobs with many states), across multiple savepoints > > >>>> (discover > > >>>>>>> how > > >>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> changed over time) or by joining it with keyed or > > >>>> non-keyed > > >>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>> data > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> serve more complex queries on the state. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The only solution that seems to serve all these > > >> use-cases > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> requirements > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in a straightforward and SQL canonical way is to simply > > >>>>> expose > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata as a separate table. This is a metadata table > > >>>> but > > >>>>> you > > >>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> think of it as data table, it makes no practical > > >>>> difference > > >>>>>>> here. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Once we have a catalog later, the catalog can offer > > >> this > > >>>>> table > > >>>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> box, the same way databases provide metadata tables. > > >> For > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> work > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> however we need another, simpler connector that creates > > >>>> this > > >>>>>>>> table. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for state metadata as a separate connector/table, > > >>>> instead > > >>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>> adding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> virtual columns and adhoc catalog metadata that is hard > > >>>> to > > >>>>> use > > >>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>> large > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> number of queries. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gyula > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 12:44 PM Gabor Somogyi < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’m planning on adding this, and we may collaborate > > >>>> on > > >>>>> it > > >>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> future. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 on this, just ping me. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Metadata Table vs. Metadata Column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After some code digging and POC all I can say that > > >> with > > >>>>>>> heavy > > >>>>>>>>>> effort > > >>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe add such changes that we're able to show > > >> metadata > > >>>>> of a > > >>>>>>>>>>> savepoint > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> catalog. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not against that but from user perspective this > > >> has > > >>>>>>> limited > > >>>>>>>>>>> value, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> let > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> me explain why. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From high level perspective I see the following > > >> which I > > >>>>> see > > >>>>>>>>>> agreement > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * We should have a catalog which is representing one > > >> or > > >>>>> more > > >>>>>>>> jobs > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> savepoint > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> data set (future plan) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * Savepoints should be able to be registered in the > > >>>>> catalog > > >>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> databases (future plan) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * There must be a possiblity to create tables from > > >>>>> databases > > >>>>>>>>> where > > >>>>>>>>>>>> users > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can read state data (exists already) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In terms of metadata, If I understand correctly then > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> suggested > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> approach > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be to access > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it from the catalog describe command, right? Adding > > >>>> that > > >>>>>>> info > > >>>>>>>>> when > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> specific > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> database describe command > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is executed could be done. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The question is for instance how can users create > > >> such > > >>>> a > > >>>>>>> logic > > >>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>> tells > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> them what is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the difference between multiple savepoints? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to give some examples: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * per operator size changes between savepoints > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * show values from operator data where state size > > >>>> reaches > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>> boundary > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> * in general "find which checkpoint ruined things" is > > >>>>> quite > > >>>>>>>>> common > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> pattern > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What I would like to highlight here is that from > > >> Flink > > >>>>>>> point of > > >>>>>>>>>> view > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata can be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> considered as a static side output information but > > >> for > > >>>>> users > > >>>>>>>>> these > > >>>>>>>>>>>> values > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> are actual real data > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> where logic is planned to build around. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The metadata is more like one-time information > > >>>> instead > > >>>>> of > > >>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>> streaming > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> data that changes all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the time, so a single connector seems to be an > > >>>> overkill. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> State data is also static within a savepoint and > > >> that's > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> reason > > >>>>>>>>>>> why > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> state processor API is working in batch mode. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> When we handle multiple checkpoints in a streaming > > >>>> fashion > > >>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> viewed from another angle. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can come up with more lightweight solution other > > >>>> than a > > >>>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>>>>>> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but enforcing users to parse the catalog > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> describe command output in order to compare multiple > > >>>>>>> savepoints > > >>>>>>>>>>> doesn't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sound smooth user experience. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Honestly I've no other idea how exposing metadata as > > >>>> real > > >>>>>>> user > > >>>>>>>>> data > > >>>>>>>>>>> so > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> waiting on other approaches. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 2:44 AM Shengkai Fang < > > >>>>>>>> fskm...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking forward to hearing the good news! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>> 于2025年3月12日周三 > > >>>>>>>>> 22:24写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for both the valuable input! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me take a closer look at the suggestions, > > >> like > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> Catalog > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> capabilities > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and possibility of embedding TypeInformation or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> StateDescriptor metadata directly into the raw > > >>>> state > > >>>>>>>> files... > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 8:17 AM Shengkai Fang < > > >>>>>>>>>> fskm...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for Zakelly's clarification. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to delay the discussion about this. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Metadata Table vs. Metadata Column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’d like to share my perspective on the State > > >>>>> Catalog > > >>>>>>>>>> proposal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> While > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> introducing this capability is beneficial, > > >> there > > >>>> is > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>> blocker: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> StateBackend architecture does not permit > > >>>> operators > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> encode > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TypeInformation into the state—it only > > >> preserves > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> Serializer. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limitation creates an asymmetry, as operators > > >>>> alone > > >>>>>>>> retain > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data structure’s schema. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To address this, I suggest allowing operators > > >> to > > >>>>> embed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TypeInformation > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> StateDescriptor metadata directly into the raw > > >>>> state > > >>>>>>>> files. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Such > > >>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> design > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would enable the Catalog to: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Parse state files and programmatically > > >> derive > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>> schema > > >>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structural > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guarantees for each state. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Leverage existing Flink Table utilities, > > >> such > > >>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LegacyTypeInfoDataTypeConverter (in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.flink.table.types.utils), > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bridge TypeInformation and DataType > > >> conversions. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we can not store the TypeInformation or > > >>>>>>>> StateDescriptor > > >>>>>>>>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> raw > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state files, I am +1 for this FLIP to use > > >>>> metadata > > >>>>>>> column > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> retrieve > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zakelly Lan <zakelly....@gmail.com> > > >>>> 于2025年3月12日周三 > > >>>>>>>> 12:43写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gabor and Shengkai, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for sharing your thoughts! This is a > > >>>> long > > >>>>>>>>> discussion > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sorry > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the late reply (I'm busy catching up with > > >>>> release > > >>>>>>> 2.0 > > >>>>>>>>> these > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> days). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let me first clarify your thoughts to ensure > > >> I > > >>>>>>>> understand > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IIUC, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is no persistent configuration for > > >> state > > >>>> TTL > > >>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> checkpoint. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can infer that TTL is enabled by reading > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> serializer, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checkpoint > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself only stores the last access time for > > >>>> each > > >>>>>>> value. > > >>>>>>>>> So > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> only > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can show is the last access time for each > > >>>>> value. > > >>>>>>> But > > >>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for all state backends to store this, as they > > >>>> may > > >>>>>>>>> directly > > >>>>>>>>>>>> store > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expired time. This will also increase the > > >>>>>>> difficulty of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> & > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintenance. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This once again reiterates the importance of > > >>>>> unified > > >>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checkpoints. I’m planning on adding this, and > > >>>> we > > >>>>> may > > >>>>>>>>>>>> collaborate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the future. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Metadata Table vs. Metadata Column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not in favor of adding a new connector > > >> for > > >>>>>>>> metadata. > > >>>>>>>>>> The > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more like one-time information instead of a > > >>>>>>> streaming > > >>>>>>>>> data > > >>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the time, so a single connector seems to be > > >> an > > >>>>>>>> overkill. > > >>>>>>>>> It > > >>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easy > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> withdraw a connector if we have a better > > >>>> solution > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>> future. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> familiar with current Catalog capabilities, > > >>>> and if > > >>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>> could > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> extract > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> show some operator-level information from > > >>>>> savepoint, > > >>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the Catalog can't do that, I would > > >> consider > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> current > > >>>>>>>>>>> FLIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compromise solution. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And if we have that unified metadata for > > >>>>>>>>>> checkpoint/savepoint > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may directly register savepoint in catalog, > > >> and > > >>>>>>> create > > >>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>> source > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specifying complex columns, as well as > > >> describe > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>> savepoint > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> catalog > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get the metadata. That's a good solution in > > >> my > > >>>>> mind. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zakelly > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 10:35 AM Shengkai > > >> Fang > > >>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> fskm...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gabor, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Adding a new connector with > > >>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would argue against introducing a new > > >>>>> connector > > >>>>>>>> type > > >>>>>>>>>>> named > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> savepoint-metadata, as the existing Catalog > > >>>>>>> mechanism > > >>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inherently > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide the necessary connector factory > > >>>>>>> capabilities. > > >>>>>>>>>> I’ve > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> detailed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposal in branch[1]. Please take a moment > > >>>> to > > >>>>>>> review > > >>>>>>>>> it. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we introduce a connector named > > >>>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata`, > > >>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> means > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> user > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create a temporary table with connector > > >>>>>>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector needs to check whether table > > >>>> schema is > > >>>>>>> same > > >>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> schema > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed in the FLIP. On the other hand, > > >> it's > > >>>>> not > > >>>>>>>> easy > > >>>>>>>>>> work > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> users a metadata table with same schema. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/compare/master...fsk119:flink:state-metadata?expand=1#diff-712a7bc92fe46c405fb0e61b475bb2a005cb7a72bab7df28bbb92744bcb5f465R63 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>> 于2025年3月11日周二 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 16:56写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Shengkai, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From directional perspective I agree your > > >>>> idea > > >>>>>>> how > > >>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Previously I've mentioned that TTL > > >>>> information > > >>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>> exposed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> processor API (which the SQL state > > >>>> connector > > >>>>>>> uses > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>> read > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> data) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and unless somebody show me the opposite > > >>>> this > > >>>>>>> FLIP > > >>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> going > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> address > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this to avoid feature creep. Our users > > >> are > > >>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>> interested > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TTL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sooner or later we're going to expose it, > > >>>> this > > >>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>> matter > > >>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scheduling. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Adding a new connector with > > >>>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure I understand your point at all > > >>>>> related > > >>>>>>>>>>>> StateCatalog. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can't agree more that StateCatalog is > > >>>> needed > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>> is a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> planned > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> block in an upcoming > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLIP but not sure how can it help now? No > > >>>>> matter > > >>>>>>>>> what, > > >>>>>>>>>>> your > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knowledge > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> essential when we add StateCatalog. Let > > >> me > > >>>>>>> expose > > >>>>>>>> my > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> area: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * First we need create table statements > > >> to > > >>>>>>> access > > >>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>> data > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * When we have that then we can add > > >>>>> StateCatalog > > >>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>>>> could > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> potentially > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ease the life of users by for ex. giving > > >>>>>>>>> off-the-shelf > > >>>>>>>>>>>> tables > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sweating with create table statements > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> User expectations: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * See state data (this is fulfilled with > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>> existing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * See metadata about state data like TTL > > >>>> (this > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>> added > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> column as you suggested since it belongs > > >> to > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> data) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * See metadata about operators (this can > > >> be > > >>>>>>> added > > >>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> savepoint-metadata) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Important to highlight that state data > > >>>> table > > >>>>>>> format > > >>>>>>>>>>> differs > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata table format. Namely one table > > >> has > > >>>>> rows > > >>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> values > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another has rows for operators, right? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that's the reason why you've > > >>>>> pinpointed > > >>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggested > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata columns are somewhat clunky. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As a conclusion I agree to add > > >>>>> ${state-name}_ttl > > >>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> later > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since it belongs to the state value and > > >>>>> adding a > > >>>>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>>>>> table > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> type > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (like > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggested similar to PG [1]) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for metadata. Please see how Spark does > > >>>> that > > >>>>> too > > >>>>>>>> [2]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you have better approach then please > > >>>>>>> elaborate > > >>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> details > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help me to understand your point. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Up until now we've seen even in TB > > >>>>> savepoints > > >>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> number > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keys > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be extremely huge but not the per key > > >>>> state > > >>>>>>>> itself. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But again, this is a good feature as-is > > >>>> and > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>> handled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just created > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-37456. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/view-pg-tables.html > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://www.databricks.com/blog/announcing-state-reader-api-new-statestore-data-source > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 3:55 AM Shengkai > > >>>> Fang > > >>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fskm...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Gabor. Thanks for your response. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for addressing the > > >> limitations > > >>>>> here. > > >>>>>>>>>>> However, I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be beneficial to further clarify the > > >> API > > >>>> in > > >>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>> FLIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> users > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can specify the TTL column. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One potential approach that comes to > > >>>> mind is > > >>>>>>>> using > > >>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standardized > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> naming > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convention such as ${state-name}_ttl > > >> for > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> defines > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the TTL value. In terms of > > >>>> implementation, > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> listReadableMetadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> function could: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Read the table’s columns and > > >>>>> configuration, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Extract all defined state names, and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Return a structured list of metadata > > >>>>>>> entries > > >>>>>>>>>>> formatted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ${state-name}_ttl. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Adding a new connector with > > >>>>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Introducing a new connector type at > > >> this > > >>>>> stage > > >>>>>>>> may > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unnecessarily > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complicate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the system. Given that every table > > >>>> already > > >>>>>>>> belongs > > >>>>>>>>>> to a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Catalog, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to provide a Factory for > > >>>> building > > >>>>>>> source > > >>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>> sink > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connectors, I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> propose integrating a dedicated > > >>>> StateCatalog > > >>>>>>>>> instead. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> This > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approach > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow us to: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Leverage the Catalog’s existing > > >>>>>>> capabilities > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> manage > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> TTL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g., state names and TTL logic) > > >> without > > >>>>>>>>> duplicating > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Provide a unified interface for > > >>>> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>> instantiation > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handling through the Catalog’s Factory > > >>>>>>> pattern. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Would this design decision better align > > >>>> with > > >>>>>>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> architecture’s > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extensibility and reduce redundancy? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Up until now we've seen even in TB > > >>>>>>> savepoints > > >>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> number > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keys > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be extremely huge but not the per key > > >>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>> itself. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But again, this is a good feature > > >> as-is > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> handled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for a separate jira. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor Somogyi < > > >> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com > > >>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 于2025年3月10日周一 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 19:05写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Shengkai, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please see my comments inline. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 7:07 AM > > >> Shengkai > > >>>>>>> Fang < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fskm...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Gabor. Thanks for your the > > >> FLIP. > > >>>> I > > >>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FLIP: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. State TTL for Value Columns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How can users retrieve the state > > >> TTL > > >>>>>>>>>> (Time-to-Live) > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> value > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> column? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From my understanding of the > > >> current > > >>>>>>> design, > > >>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>> seems > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functionality is not supported. > > >> Could > > >>>>> you > > >>>>>>>>> clarify > > >>>>>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plans > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> address this limitation? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since the state processor API is not > > >>>> yet > > >>>>>>>> exposing > > >>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would require several steps. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> First, the state processor API > > >> support > > >>>>>>> needs to > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>> added > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exposed on the SQL API. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is definitely a future > > >> improvement > > >>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>> useful > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a separate jira. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Metadata Table vs. Metadata > > >> Column > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The metadata information described > > >> in > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> FLIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>> appears > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intended > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> describe the state files stored at > > >> a > > >>>>>>> specific > > >>>>>>>>>>>> location. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concept > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aligns more closely with system > > >>>> tables > > >>>>>>> like > > >>>>>>>>>>> pg_tables > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PostgreSQL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the INFORMATION_SCHEMA in MySQL > > >> [2]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adding a new connector with > > >>>>>>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>> is a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> possibility > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can create such functionality. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not against that, just want to > > >>>> have a > > >>>>>>>> common > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> agreement > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like to move that direction. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (As a side note not just PG but Spark > > >>>> also > > >>>>>>> has > > >>>>>>>>>>> similar > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approach > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basically like the idea). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we would go that direction > > >> savepoint > > >>>>>>>> metadata > > >>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reached > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that one row would represent > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an operator with it's values > > >> something > > >>>>> like > > >>>>>>>> this: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > ┌─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬─────────┬────────┐ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > │operatorN│operatorU│operatorH│paralleli│maxParall│subtaskSt│coordinat│totalSta│ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ame │id │ash │sm > > >>>>>>> │elism > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │atesCount│orStateSi│tesSizeI│ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ │ │ │ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │zeInBytes│nBytes │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > ├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┤ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │Source: │datagen-s│47aee9439│2 > > >>>>> │128 > > >>>>>>>>>> │2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │16 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │546 │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │datagen-s│ource-uid│4d6ea26e2│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ource │ │d544bef0a│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ │ │37bb5 │ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > ├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┤ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │long-udf-│long-udf-│6ed3f40bf│2 > > >>>>> │128 > > >>>>>>>>>> │2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │with-mast│with-mast│f3c8dfcdf│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │er-hook │er-hook-u│cb95128a1│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ │id │018f1 │ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > ├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┤ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │value-pro│value-pro│ca4f5fe9a│2 > > >>>>> │128 > > >>>>>>>>>> │2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │40726 │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │cess │cess-uid │637b656f0│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ │ │9ea78b3e7│ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ │ │a15b9 │ > > >>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> │ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > ├─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼─────────┼────────┤ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This table can then be joined with > > >> the > > >>>>>>> actually > > >>>>>>>>>>>> existing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> `savepoint` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connector created tables based on UID > > >>>> hash > > >>>>>>>> (which > > >>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> unique > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> always > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exists). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This would mean that the already > > >>>> existing > > >>>>>>> table > > >>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> need > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> metadata column which is the UID > > >> hash. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @zakelly, plz share your thoughts > > >> too. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we opt to use metadata columns, > > >>>> every > > >>>>>>>> record > > >>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> table > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> end > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> having identical values for these > > >>>>> columns > > >>>>>>>>> (please > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> correct > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’m > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mistaken). On the other hand, the > > >>>> state > > >>>>>>>>> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> requires > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> users > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specify > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an operator UID or operator UID > > >> hash, > > >>>>>>> after > > >>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outputs > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> user-defined > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> values in its records. This > > >> approach > > >>>>> feels > > >>>>>>>>>> somewhat > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> redundant > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we would add a new > > >>>> `savepoint-metadata` > > >>>>>>>>>> connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> addressed. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand UID and UID hash > > >> are > > >>>>>>> having > > >>>>>>>>>>> either-or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> relationship > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> config perspective, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so when a user provides the UID then > > >>>>> he/she > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> interested > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hash > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for further calculations > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (the whole Flink internals are > > >>>> depending > > >>>>> on > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> hash). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Printing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> human readable UID > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is an explicit requirement from the > > >>>> user > > >>>>>>> side > > >>>>>>>>>> because > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hashes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> human > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> readable. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Handling LIST and MAP States in > > >>>> the > > >>>>>>> State > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have concerns about how the > > >> current > > >>>>>>> design > > >>>>>>>>>>> handles > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> LIST > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MAP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> states. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Specifically, the state connector > > >>>> uses > > >>>>>>> Flink > > >>>>>>>>>> SQL’s > > >>>>>>>>>>>> MAP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ARRAY > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> types, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which implies that it attempts to > > >>>> load > > >>>>>>> entire > > >>>>>>>>> MAP > > >>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> LIST > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> states > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, in many real-world > > >>>> scenarios, > > >>>>>>> these > > >>>>>>>>>> states > > >>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grow > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> very > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> large. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Typically, the state API addresses > > >>>> this > > >>>>> by > > >>>>>>>>>>> providing > > >>>>>>>>>>>> an > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iterator > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> traverse elements within the state > > >>>>>>>>> incrementally. > > >>>>>>>>>>> I’m > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsure > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whether > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed something in FLIP-496 or > > >>>>> FLIP-512, > > >>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> seems > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> design might struggle with > > >>>> scalability > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>>>> such > > >>>>>>>>>>> cases. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You see it good, the current > > >>>>> implementation > > >>>>>>>> keeps > > >>>>>>>>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> key > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Back in the days we've considered > > >> this > > >>>>>>>> potential > > >>>>>>>>>>> issue > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> concluded > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this is not necessarily > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed for the initial version and > > >> can > > >>>> be > > >>>>>>> done > > >>>>>>>>> as a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> later > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> improvement. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Up until now we've seen even in TB > > >>>>>>> savepoints > > >>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> number > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keys > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be extremely huge but not the per key > > >>>>> state > > >>>>>>>>> itself. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But again, this is a good feature > > >> as-is > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> handled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jira. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Shengkai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/view-pg-tables.html > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.4/en/information-schema-tables-table.html > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gabor Somogyi < > > >>>>> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 于2025年3月3日周一 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02:00写道： > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Zakelly, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In order to shoot for simplicity > > >>>>>>> `METADATA > > >>>>>>>>>>> VIRTUAL` > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> key > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition is the target. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When it's not super complex the > > >>>> latter > > >>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>> added > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> too. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 2, 2025 at 3:37 PM > > >>>> Zakelly > > >>>>>>> Lan > > >>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zakelly....@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Gabor, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for this. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will the metadata column use > > >>>>> `METADATA > > >>>>>>>>>> VIRTUAL` > > >>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> key > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition, or `METADATA FROM > > >> xxx > > >>>>>>>> VIRTUAL` > > >>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> renaming, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kafka table? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Zakelly > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2025 at 1:31 PM > > >>>> Gabor > > >>>>>>>>> Somogyi > > >>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to start a > > >> discussion > > >>>> of > > >>>>>>>>> FLIP-512: > > >>>>>>>>>>> Add > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> meta > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SQL > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> state connector [1]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feel free to add your > > >> thoughts > > >>>> to > > >>>>>>> make > > >>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-512%3A+Add+meta+information+to+SQL+state+connector > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BR, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
