+1

On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Xiao Li <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1
>
> 2017-11-04 11:00 GMT-07:00 Burak Yavuz <[email protected]>:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:02 PM, vaquar khan <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Weichen Xu <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Matei Zaharia <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 from me too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Matei
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Nov 3, 2017, at 4:59 PM, Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > +1.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I think this architecture makes a lot of sense to let executors talk
>>>>> to source/sink directly, and bring very low latency.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > +0 simply because I don't feel I know enough to have an opinion. I
>>>>> have no reason to doubt the change though, from a skim through the doc.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:37 PM Reynold Xin <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Earlier I sent out a discussion thread for CP in Structured
>>>>> Streaming:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-20928
>>>>> >
>>>>> > It is meant to be a very small, surgical change to Structured
>>>>> Streaming to enable ultra-low latency. This is great timing because we are
>>>>> also designing and implementing data source API v2. If designed properly,
>>>>> we can have the same data source API working for both streaming and batch.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Following the SPIP process, I'm putting this SPIP up for a vote.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > +1: Let's go ahead and design / implement the SPIP.
>>>>> > +0: Don't really care.
>>>>> > -1: I do not think this is a good idea for the following reasons.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Vaquar Khan
>>> +1 -224-436-0783 <(224)%20436-0783>
>>> Greater Chicago
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to