Thank you Robert, I'll give this a spin -- obvious now that you point
it out. I'll go ahead and continue the line on inquiry on the JIRA.

-n

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:18 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Nick,
>
> both JIRA and the mailing list are good. In this case I'd say JIRA would be
> better because then everybody has the full context of the discussion.
>
> The issue is fixed in 0.10, which is not yet released.
>
> You can work around the issue by implementing a custom SourceFunction which
> returns the POJOs.
>
> Here's an example of a source function which returns just integers.
>
> StreamExecutionEnvironment see =
> StreamExecutionEnvironment.getExecutionEnvironment();
>
> DataStreamSource<Integer> src = see.addSource(new
> RichParallelSourceFunction<Integer>() {
>
>    boolean running = true;
>    @Override
>    public void run(SourceContext<Integer> ctx) throws Exception {
>       int i = 0;
>       while (running) {
>          ctx.collect(i++);
>       }
>    }
>
>    @Override
>    public void cancel() {
>       running = false;
>    }
> });
>
>
> Let me know if you need further advice.
>
> Robert
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Heya,
>>
>> I'm writing my first flink streaming application and have a flow that
>> passes type checking and complies. I've written a simple end-to-end
>> test with junit, using StreamExecutionEnvironment#fromElements() to
>> provide a stream if valid and invalid test objects; the objects are
>> POJOs.
>>
>> It seems I'm running into FLINK-2124. Is there a work-around I can use
>> with 0.9.1 release, perhaps another API through which I can pass in
>> the type information explicitly? Variants of #fromCollection also fail
>> with the same error, and I've tried registering my POJO explicitly
>> with StreamExecutionEnvironment#registerType, also to no effect.
>>
>> Apologies to posting both on the JIRA and here; I'm new to the
>> community and don't know which means is most expedient for user
>> questions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>
>

Reply via email to