When consensus not happening we will go with VOTE. I think we have 2
candidates of names which are table and relation.
- Henry
On Wednesday, March 25, 2015, Aljoscha Krettek wrote:
> I also prefer Relation. So what should we do? Doesn't really look like
> consensus.
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at
I agree with Aljoscha on this. DataTable does not make a lot of sense to
me... (except for going nicely with DataSet and DataStream).
2015-03-25 13:58 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek :
> But why DataTable? What other kind of Table could it be, CarTable? :D
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Alexande
But why DataTable? What other kind of Table could it be, CarTable? :D
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Alexander Alexandrov
wrote:
> +1 for DataTable as core abstraction name and "flink-table" or something
> similar as the package name.
>
> 2015-03-25 11:54 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek :
>
>> I als
+1 for DataTable as core abstraction name and "flink-table" or something
similar as the package name.
2015-03-25 11:54 GMT+01:00 Aljoscha Krettek :
> I also prefer Relation. So what should we do? Doesn't really look like
> consensus.
>
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Paris Carbone wrote:
> >
I also prefer Relation. So what should we do? Doesn't really look like
consensus.
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Paris Carbone wrote:
> Both names look ok but if I had to choose I would go for the Relation API.
> It defines a new DSL in contrast to data types (ie DataSet, DataStream) so it
> d
Both names look ok but if I had to choose I would go for the Relation API.
It defines a new DSL in contrast to data types (ie DataSet, DataStream) so it
doesn’t have to follow the same convention.
Plus, it is a single word with sufficient meaning.
Paris
On 21 Mar 2015, at 17:29, Fabian Hueske
m
I'm in favor of Relation API because the API operates on a set of tuples
with a fixed (flat) schema which is known as relation from relational
databases.
Everybody who took a database intro class should be familiar with this term.
On Mar 21, 2015 5:14 PM, "Henry Saputra" wrote:
> I like the Rela
OK, as recommended by Fabian, I explain why I like Relational better =)
The concept of Relational suggest the concept of querying data based
on the relationship of different sources and the predicates/ filters
attached to them.
Or we could go more like keyword name such as "REMOQ" which stands fo
I like the Relation or Relational. So maybe we could use DataRelation
as the abstraction?
- Henry
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Fabian Hueske wrote:
> I am also more in favor of Rel and Relation, but DataTable nicely follows
> the terms DataSet and DataStream.
> On Mar 16, 2015 4:58 PM, "Alj
I am also more in favor of Rel and Relation, but DataTable nicely follows
the terms DataSet and DataStream.
On Mar 16, 2015 4:58 PM, "Aljoscha Krettek" wrote:
> I like Relation or Rel, is shorter.
> On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" wrote:
>
> > +1 for DataTable
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2
I like Relation and Relation API more than Table API.
Rel is quite cryptic though :)
On Mar 16, 2015 5:58 PM, "Aljoscha Krettek" wrote:
> I like Relation or Rel, is shorter.
> On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" wrote:
>
> > +1 for DataTable
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohr
I like Relation or Rel, is shorter.
On Mar 16, 2015 4:52 PM, "Hermann Gábor" wrote:
> +1 for DataTable
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohrmann
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for DataTable
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi <
> balassi.mar...@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> >
+1 for DataTable
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM Till Rohrmann wrote:
> +1 for DataTable
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi >
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for Max's suggestion.
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximi
+1 for DataTable
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Márton Balassi
wrote:
> +1 for Max's suggestion.
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximilian Michels
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks for starting the discussion. We should defini
+1 for Max's suggestion.
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximilian Michels
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks for starting the discussion. We should definitely not keep
> > flink-expressions.
> >
> > I'm in favor of DataTable for the DataSet abstr
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Maximilian Michels wrote:
>
> Thanks for starting the discussion. We should definitely not keep
> flink-expressions.
>
> I'm in favor of DataTable for the DataSet abstraction equivalent. For
> consistency, the package name should then be flink-table. At first
> si
Hi Aljoscha,
Thanks for starting the discussion. We should definitely not keep
flink-expressions.
I'm in favor of DataTable for the DataSet abstraction equivalent. For
consistency, the package name should then be flink-table. At first
sight, the name seems kind of plain but I think it is quite in
Hi Folks,
as mentioned in the title, we need a good name for this. Right now the
API is called Expression API, the package is flink-expressions and the
thing on which you call operations (equivalent to DataSet or
DataStream) is called ExpressionOperation. Especially the last one is
extremely ugly.
18 matches
Mail list logo
