Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

finished yet. But we're > working on it and are happy for every helping hand :-) > > Cheers, > Till > > On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 2:27 AM, Manu Zhang > wrote: > > If there are not any existing jira for standalone v2.0, may I open a new > one ? > > Thanks, >

Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

If there are not any existing jira for standalone v2.0, may I open a new one ? Thanks, Manu On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:39 PM Manu Zhang wrote: > Good to know that. > > Is it the "standalone setup v2.0" section ? The wiki page has no > Google-Doc-like change histories.

Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

multiple TaskManagers on a machine. > > Best, > Stephan > > > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Manu Zhang > wrote: > > Thanks Stephan, > > They don't use YARN now but I think they will consider it. Do you think > it would be beneficial to provide such

Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

ctive shells) and it pre-allocates and manages a lot of > memory for batch jobs. > > > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Manu Zhang > wrote: > > The pro for the multi-tenant cluster mode is that you can share data > between jobs and you don't have to spin up a new c

Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

ated from any other jobs (given that you don't submit other jobs to > this cluster). > > Cheers, > Till > > On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Manu Zhang > wrote: > >> Thanks Fabian and Till. >> >> We have customers who are interested in using Flink but very

Re: separation of JVMs for different applications

oyments via resource providers (YARN, Mesos, > etc.) which allow to start Flink processes per job. > > Till (in CC) is more familiar with the FLIP-6 effort and might be able to > add more detail. > > Best, > Fabian > > 2016-12-01 4:16 GMT+01:00 Manu Zhang : > > Hi al

separation of JVMs for different applications

but didn't found any mention of changing it in the future. Any thoughts or have I missed anything ? Thanks, Manu Zhang

Re: emit partial state in window (streaming)

Hi Luis, You may try ContinuousEventTimeTrigger that continuously fire on given time interval instead of writing your own. Note that w

Re: watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

to take charge of it. > > That said, I'm also not sure if discussions are ongoing. I had hoped to > prototype the proposal as is, to have something more concrete to discuss. > > Cheers, > aj > On Nov 1, 2016 3:24 PM, "Manu Zhang" wrote: > > Thanks. The ideal c

Re: watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

ecent PR > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2736 you would be able to evict > elements from the window state after the window function was called. > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 at 02:27 Manu Zhang wrote: > > Yes, here's the example > https://github.

Re: watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

Oct 31, 2016 at 10:29 PM Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > Hmm, I don't completely understand what's going on. Could you maybe post > an example, with the trigger code that shows this behaviour? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 at 17:12 Manu Zhang wrote: >

Re: watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

> > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 at 04:04 Manu Zhang wrote: > > Hi Aljoscha, > > Thanks for your response. My use case is to track user trajectory based > on page view event when they visit a website. The input would be like a > list of PageView(u

Re: watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

1:07), List(("a", 1:00), ("b", 1:03), ("c", 1:06)) is emitted > > It seems that if *("c", 1:06) is processed before watermark(1:04)* > List(("a", 1:00), ("b", 1:03), ("c", 1:06)) will be emitted on > watermark(1:04). This is incorrect since there could be elements with > timestamp between 1:04 and 1:06 that have not arrived yet. > > I guess this is because watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's > timestamp has been passed. > > Please correct me if any of the above is not right. > > Thanks, > Manu Zhang > > > >

watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp is passed

will be emitted on watermark(1:04). This is incorrect since there could be elements with timestamp between 1:04 and 1:06 that have not arrived yet. I guess this is because watermark trigger doesn't check whether element's timestamp has been passed. Please correct me if any of the above is not right. Thanks, Manu Zhang

Re: Session windows - Evaluation of addition of element + window expires/gets discarded after some set time of inactivity

termark. Thanks, Manu Zhang On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:08 PM Anchit Jatana wrote: > Hi All, > > I have a use case where in I'm supposed to work with Session Windows to > maintain some values for some sessionIDs/keys. > > The use case is as follows: > > I need to mainta