[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7337?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16110994#comment-16110994
]
Timo Walther commented on FLINK-7337:
-------------------------------------
In general, I like your approach (esp. the 1 bit overhead is a nice solution).
The only question I have is, if we remove the separation of logical and
physical row type, how do we track if a field is a time indicator? This has to
be defined either in the field data type or the record data type. We cannot
allow any Long field as a timestamp. How do we handle operations like {{rowtime
- 100}}?
> Refactor handling of time indicator attributes
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-7337
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7337
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Table API & SQL
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0
> Reporter: Fabian Hueske
> Assignee: Fabian Hueske
>
> After a [discussion on the dev mailing
> list|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/735d55f9022df8ff73566a9f1553e14be94f8443986ad46559b35869@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E]
> I propose the following changes to the current handling of time indicator
> attributes:
> * Remove the separation of logical and physical row type.
> ** Hold the event-time timestamp as regular Long field in Row
> ** Represent the processing-time indicator type as a null-valued field in Row
> (1 bit overhead)
> * Remove materialization of event-time timestamps because timestamp is
> already accessible in Row.
> * Add {{ProcessFunction}} to set timestamp into the timestamp field of a
> {{StreamRecord}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
