> Regarding the event-time processing and watermarking, I have got that if
> an event will be received late, after the allowed lateness time, it will be
> dropped even though I think it is an antithesis of exactly-once semantic.
>
> Yes, allowed lateness is a compromise between exactly-once semanti
Tang
From: Mohammad NM
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2019 2:41
To: user@flink.apache.org
Subject: Exactly-once ambiguities
Dear Flink team,
I have some ambiguity when it comes to Flink's exactly-once guaranteeing.
1. Based on what I understand, when a failure occurs, s
Dear Flink team,
I have some ambiguity when it comes to Flink's exactly-once guaranteeing.
1. Based on what I understand, when a failure occurs, some events will be
replayed which causes them to appear twice in the computations. I cannot
realize how the two-phase commit protocol can avoid this prob
