I agree! My long-term goal is that a Configuration is the basis of truth
and that the programmatic setter methods and everything else just modify
the underlying configuration.
We have made big steps in at least allowing to configure most (if not
all) StreamExecutionEnvironment and TableEnviron
That's fine and it's basically what I do as well..I was arguing that it's
bad (IMHO) that you could access the config from the BatchTableEnvironment
(via bte.getConfig().getConfiguration()).
You legitimately think that you are customizing the env but that's
illusory. You should not be able to set p
I'm not entirely sure, if I completely understand the interaction of BTE
and ExecEnv, but I'd create it this way
Configuration conf = new Configuration();
conf.setInteger(TaskManagerOptions.NUM_TASK_SLOTS, PARALLELISM);
ExecutionEnvironment env = ExecutionEnvironment.createLocalEnvironment(conf);
Hi Flavio,
I think the recommended approach is as follows: (then you don't need to
create to environments)
final Configuration conf = new Configuration();
conf.setLong(...)
env = new LocalEnvironment(conf);
I agree that in theory it would be nicer if the configuration returned was
editable, but
Hi to all,
migrating to Flink 1.11 I've tried to customize the exec env in this way:
ExecutionEnvironment env = ExecutionEnvironment.getExecutionEnvironment();
BatchTableEnvironment bte = BatchTableEnvironment.create(env);
final Configuration conf = bte.getConfig().getConfiguration();
conf.setLong
