+1 on offering both.
This way we cover both simplicity and expressivity when needed. Annotations
give a very clean and simple way for marking state imho.
Perhaps most casual users will find it much better to just tag the fields that
they want to persist.
Paris
> On 01 Jul 2015, at 15:55, Step
Actually, this is the first rework of the state interface. There is only
one released version, yet.
What we are doing here is trying to make sure that this first rework will
most likely also be the last for the foreseeable future.
>From the use cases I can think of, we need at least two different
I agree, if we want to change the interface, now is the best time.
So you are suggesting to change the methods in the Checkpointed interface
from
T snapshotState(long checkpointId, long checkpointTimestamp) throws Exception;
void restoreState(T state);
to
void onSnapshot(id, ts)
void onRestore
I understand your concerns Robert but I don't fully agree.
The Checkpointed interface works indeed but there are so many use cases
that it is not suitable for in the long run, and also the whole interface
is slightly awkward in my opinion when returning simple fields which are
already serializable
Whats causing me the biggest headache here is that I don't see an end on
all these "state interface" reworks.
I think this is now the third big change to the interface.
It is a horrible user experience to rework your old code with each new
Flink release.
I understand that there are always ways to
On 01 Jul 2015, at 10:57, Gyula Fóra wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Thanks for the feedback guys:
>
> @Max: You are right, this is not top priority to changes, I was just
> mocking up some alternatives to try to make the state usage even simpler so
> that the user can keep his current implementations and j
Hey,
Thanks for the feedback guys:
@Max: You are right, this is not top priority to changes, I was just
mocking up some alternatives to try to make the state usage even simpler so
that the user can keep his current implementations and just add 1-2
annotations.
@Stephan, Robert: You are right tha
+1 for adding the annotation, but not removing the interface
Robert is right, the nice thing about the current interface is that you can
use it to commit the state yourself to a database and simply return a key
to where the state is stored. That is quite nice.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Rob
I would certainly not replace the current Checkpointed interface by this
implementation.
The interface allows you to perform custom actions when creating a snapshot
or restoring state.
We could add the annotation variant for simple cases like in your example.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Max
Hi Gyula,
Looks like a neat feature you thought of; I like it. One problem I see is
that with all the big changes and discussions in streaming, I wonder if we
should get other things right first. Another problem could be the lack of
clarity of this implementation. State annotations can now be very
Wow, this looks pretty concise. I really like it!
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 3:27 PM Gyula Fóra wrote:
> Hey all!
>
> Just to add something new to the end of the discussion list. After some
> discussion with Seif, and Paris, I have added a commit that replaces the
> use of the Checkpointed interfac
Hey all!
Just to add something new to the end of the discussion list. After some
discussion with Seif, and Paris, I have added a commit that replaces the
use of the Checkpointed interface with field annotations.
This is probably the most lightweight state declaration so far and it will
probably w
12 matches
Mail list logo
