the
> >>>>> operator [1] that is close to be merged and will be available in
> Flink
> >>>>> 1.6.0.
> >>>>> Flink's SQL support (and Table API) support this join type since
> >>>>> version 1.4.0 [2].
> >>>&g
>>>>> version 1.4.0 [2].
>>>>>
>>>>> Best, Fabian
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/5342
>>>>> [2]
>>>>> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-
gt;>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/5342
>>>> [2] https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.4/
>>>> dev/table/sql.html#joins
>>>>
>>>> 2018-03-08 1:02 GMT-08:00 Gytis Žilinskas :
>>>>
>
link-docs-release-1.4/
>>> dev/table/sql.html#joins
>>>
>>> 2018-03-08 1:02 GMT-08:00 Gytis Žilinskas :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> we're considering flink for a couple of our projects. I'm doing a
>>>> t
>>>
>>> we're considering flink for a couple of our projects. I'm doing a
>>> trial implementation for one of them. So far, I like a lot of things,
>>> however there are a couple of issues that I can't figure out how to
>>> resolve. Not
considering flink for a couple of our projects. I'm doing a
>> trial implementation for one of them. So far, I like a lot of things,
>> however there are a couple of issues that I can't figure out how to
>> resolve. Not sure if it's me misunderstanding the tool, o
a
> trial implementation for one of them. So far, I like a lot of things,
> however there are a couple of issues that I can't figure out how to
> resolve. Not sure if it's me misunderstanding the tool, or flink just
> doesn't have a capability to do it.
>
> We w
just
doesn't have a capability to do it.
We want to do an event time join on two big kafka streams. Both of
them might experience some issues on the other end and be delayed.
Additionally, while both are big, one (let's call it stream A) is
significantly larger than stream B.
We also know,
