Thank you- It is very clear now.
Sameer
On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Till Rohrmann
wrote:
> The CEP operator maintains for each pattern a window length. This means
> that every starting event will set its own timeout value.
>
> So if T=51 arrives in the 11th minute, then it depends whether
The CEP operator maintains for each pattern a window length. This means
that every starting event will set its own timeout value.
So if T=51 arrives in the 11th minute, then it depends whether the second
T=31 arrived sometime between the 1st and 11th minute. If that's the case,
then you should als
Thanks Till,
In that case if I have a pattern -
First = T > 30
Followed By = T > 50
Within 10 minutes
If I get the following sequence of events within 10 minutes
T=31, T=51, T=31, T=51
I assume the alert will fire twice now.
But what happens if the last T=51 arrives in the 11th minute. If the
p
Hi Sameer,
the within clause of CEP uses neither tumbling nor sliding windows. It is
more like a session window which is started whenever an element which
matches the starting condition arrives. As long as new events which fulfill
the pattern definition arrive within the length of the window, they
+Till, looping him in directly, he probably missed this because he was away
for a while.
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016 at 18:21 Sameer W wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It looks like the WithIn clause of CEP uses Tumbling Windows. I could get
> it to use Sliding windows by using an upstream pipeline which uses Sliding
Hi,
It looks like the WithIn clause of CEP uses Tumbling Windows. I could get
it to use Sliding windows by using an upstream pipeline which uses Sliding
Windows and produces repeating elements (in each sliding window) and
applying a Watermark assigner on the resulting stream with elements
duplicat
