AHeise commented on a change in pull request #11403: [FLINK-16316][operators]
Implement new StreamOperatorBase as a replacement for AbstractStreamOperator
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/11403#discussion_r396961853
##########
File path:
flink-streaming-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/api/operators/YieldingOperatorFactory.java
##########
@@ -17,10 +17,13 @@
package org.apache.flink.streaming.api.operators;
+import org.apache.flink.annotation.PublicEvolving;
+
/**
* An operator that needs access to the {@link MailboxExecutor} to yield to
downstream operators needs to be created
* through a factory implementing this interface.
*/
+@PublicEvolving
public interface YieldingOperatorFactory<OUT> extends
StreamOperatorFactory<OUT> {
Review comment:
Haven't thought about this case . Since it's `Experimental`, I'm also fine
with keeping it for now.
In general, I don't think we should mix patterns though.
Here is some solution: `StreamOperatorFactory` could have a `default
boolean needsMailboxExecutor() { return false; }`, which triggers a nullable
`mailboxExecutor` to be set in `Parameters`. The same method can be used to
determine chainability.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
