Hi Becket, And thanks for the patch, Alan. I will also take a look at it this week. > This is really something long wanted, as it simplifies the > AsyncTableFunction calling syntax by so much.
I agree, I think it's a super useful feature that will make this functionality much easier to use. Happy to take any feedback you have, and I would really appreciate a review if you can take a look. Thanks, Alan On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 9:12 PM Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Timo and Alan, > > Thanks for replying. I totally understand that we wanted to create > a new FLIP as this one is inactive for a long time. I was confused mainly > because the FLIP-313 status still shows as active. > Anyways, I just started a discussion thread in the dev mailing list to > propose some convention for dealing with dormant FLIPs. It would be good to > hear your thoughts. > > And thanks for the patch, Alan. I will also take a look at it this week. > This is really something long wanted, as it simplifies the > AsyncTableFunction calling syntax by so much. > > Cheers, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 9:05 AM Alan Sheinberg > <asheinb...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > > Hi Becket, Timo, > > > > I just wanted to jump in as well, as the author of FLIP-498. > > > > This FLIP has been subsumed by FLIP-498: AsyncTableFunction for async > > > table function support [1]. In the discussion for FLIP-498, we decided > > > to discard FLIP-313 as it has been abandoned for a while. > > > > > > This was the intention, due to the inactivity of FLIP-313. They are > > similar. > > > > I hope this is ok for everyone. @Alan might give some timeline when this > > > feature will land? > > > > > > This PR for FLIP-498 is out https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26567. > > It > > can be completed soon, if I get a review for it. I'm hoping it'll be > > merged in the next week. > > > > From the FLIP-498 discussion thread, it is unclear to me whether people > had > > > agreed to "discard" FLIP-313. The FLIP-498 discussion mentioned that we > > > may potentially still add the hint based options later, which is what > was > > > proposed in FLIP-313. And I think we already see use cases in per > > > function instance options instead of job level configs. > > > > > > Hint support seems like a good set of functionality, though was out of > > scope for FLIP-498. If we wanted to re-activate FLIP-313 to focus on this > > (or create a new FLIP, if that is more appropriate) that seems good to > me. > > Happy to discuss this and coordinate, so we don't have duplicate > > discussions/implementations and can figure out how they fit together. > > > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 5:43 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi Becket, > > > > > > sorry if my -1 was too rude in this case. I thought the VOTE is just > > > outdated and should be restarted, including a fresh FLIP number and > > > discussion for it. > > > > > > If it is just about the hint based options approach, I don't have a > > > strong opinion and I'm sure we can evolve FLIP-498 further once it is > > > implemented. > > > > > > > BTW, I feel that we can do better in dealing with similar FLIPs from > > > > different contributors as well as FLIPs dormant for long. I'll > start a > > > > separate discussion on that rather than derail this thread. > > > > > > I totally agree. I'm not sure if we have a process in the by-laws > > > already, if not we should add one. A VOTE that stays around for longer > > > than 6 month or so should be treated as rejected. In the end, all what > > > matters is to get the feature in and avoid discussions around > > > overlapping design docs. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Timo > > > > > > > > > On 27.05.25 03:57, Becket Qin wrote: > > > > Thanks for pointing to FLIP-498, Timo. I missed that. > > > > > > > >>From the FLIP-498 discussion thread, it is unclear to me whether > people > > > had > > > > agreed to "discard" FLIP-313. The FLIP-498 discussion mentioned that > we > > > may > > > > potentially still add the hint based options later, which is what was > > > > proposed in FLIP-313. And I think we already see use cases in per > > > function > > > > instance options instead of job level configs. > > > > > > > > @Timo, can you clarify that by -1, do you want to veto the technical > > > > proposal of FLIP-313, or do you mean you want to have yet another > FLIP > > > > (other than FLIP-498) to add the hint based options? And why? > > > > > > > > BTW, I feel that we can do better in dealing with similar FLIPs from > > > > different contributors as well as FLIPs dormant for long. I'll start > a > > > > separate discussion on that rather than derail this thread. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:22 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> -1 > > > >> > > > >> This FLIP has been subsumed by FLIP-498: AsyncTableFunction for > async > > > >> table function support [1]. In the discussion for FLIP-498, we > decided > > > >> to discard FLIP-313 as it has been abandoned for a while. > > > >> > > > >> I hope this is ok for everyone. @Alan might give some timeline when > > this > > > >> feature will land? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Timo > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> [1] > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-498%3A+AsyncTableFunction+for+async+table+function+support > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On 26.05.25 07:51, Teunissen, F.G.J. (Fred) wrote: > > > >>> +1 (non-binding) > > > >>> > > > >>> We currently use a custom async table source and join it using FOR > > > >> SYSTEM TIME AS OF .... This approach has some challenges, especially > > > when > > > >> used after aggregations . > > > >>> > > > >>> Introducing support for an async UDTF would allow us to perform the > > > join > > > >> using LATERAL TABLE, which would greatly simplify the query > structure > > > and > > > >> improve maintainability. > > > >>> > > > >>> Kind regards, > > > >>> Fred Teunissen > > > >>> > > > >>> From: Becket Qin <becket....@gmail.com> > > > >>> Date: Thursday, 22 May 2025 at 17:08 > > > >>> To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org> > > > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] FLIP-313: Add support of User Defined > > > >> AsyncTableFunction > > > >>> > > > >>> I just realized this FLIP has never been voted to pass. > > > >>> > > > >>> +1 to the FLIP. > > > >>> This is actually something long overdue. I feel it is even more > like > > a > > > >> bug > > > >>> that we need to fix than a feature. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> > > > >>> Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > >>> > > > >>> On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 7:36 PM Aitozi <gjying1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>>> Hi devs: > > > >>>> The last comments in [1] has been addressed, I'd like to > > restart > > > >> this > > > >>>> vote thread. > > > >>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours (until June 29th, > > 10:00AM > > > >> GMT) > > > >>>> unless there is an objection or an insufficient number of votes. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> [1] > > > >> > > > > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread%2F7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969844437%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sD%2Fwr7xdTScWh464iYJLgzW%2BdE0toaLGloZ5Jtmz%2F1U%3D&reserved=0 > > > >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l> > > > >>>> [2] > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FFLINK%2FFLIP-313%253A%2BAdd%2Bsupport%2Bof%2BUser%2BDefined%2BAsyncTableFunction&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969866359%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IP%2FRjxDZqex0oXzKW58jAElrr7aWFu%2FNsouo7aYWB1E%3D&reserved=0 > > > >> < > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-313%3A+Add+support+of+User+Defined+AsyncTableFunction > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Best regards, > > > >>>> Aitozi > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Aitozi <gjying1...@gmail.com> 于2023年6月14日周三 09:47写道： > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Hi all, > > > >>>>> Thanks for all the feedback about FLIP-313: Add support of > > User > > > >>>>> Defined AsyncTableFunction[1]. Based on the discussion [2], we > have > > > >> come > > > >>>> to > > > >>>>> a consensus, so I would like to start a vote. > > > >>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours (until June 19th, > > 10:00AM > > > >>>> GMT) > > > >>>>> unless there is an objection or an insufficient number of votes. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> [1] > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FFLINK%2FFLIP-313%253A%2BAdd%2Bsupport%2Bof%2BUser%2BDefined%2BAsyncTableFunction&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969879042%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=q7wFos19f0UtOLW6q0HhrtzGKS5THv5uQtLCxc3ZzfA%3D&reserved=0 > > > >> < > > > >> > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-313%3A+Add+support+of+User+Defined+AsyncTableFunction > > > >>> > > > >>>>> [2] > > > >> > > > > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread%2F7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l&data=05%7C02%7CFred.Teunissen%40ing.com%7C065ec6c9cf4b4473046c08dd994279de%7C587b6ea13db94fe1a9d785d4c64ce5cc%7C0%7C0%7C638835232969891732%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=k5EGhhb5tWkqRLRY%2F1fuNJqCaKvtQB7vKFtbuwPkVPk%3D&reserved=0 > > > >> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/7vk1799ryvrz4lsm5254q64ctm89mx2l> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> Best regards, > > > >>>>> Aitozi > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >>> ATTENTION: > > > >>> The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for > the > > > >> intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use > > or > > > >> disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the > > > message > > > >> immediately. > > > >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
