Github user aljoscha closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is en
Github user aljoscha commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425#issuecomment-161041477
Also changed the doc.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user aljoscha commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425#issuecomment-161041124
Yes, you get each element twice, so it behaves like bag-union.
@mxm I added a test case.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user mxm commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425#issuecomment-160999814
Looks good. Is there a test case for this?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project do
Github user vasia commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425#issuecomment-161003995
Hi @aljoscha,
thanks for fixing this! It seems that, with this change, when you union a
stream with itself you get each element twice. If this is intentional, could
yo
GitHub user aljoscha opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1425
[FLINK-3080] Relax restrictions of DataStream.union()
Before, it would not allow unioning with predecessors (also transitive)
and streams of differing parallelism.
You can merge this pull reque
