Hi, yes AJ that observation is correct. Let's see what Shannon has to say about this but it might be that all "higher-level" aggregates will have to be based on the first level and can then update at the speed of that aggregate.
Cheers, Aljoscha On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 at 05:03 aj.h <drfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the way that FLIP-2 would solve this problem, secondAggregate would > ignore > the early firing updates from firstAggregate to prevent double-counting, > correct? If that's the case, I am trying to understand why we'd want to > trigger early-fires every 30 seconds for the secondAggregate if it's only > accepting new results at a daily rate, after firstAggregate's primary > firing > at the end of the window. If we filter out results from early-fires, > wouldn't every 30-second result from secondAggregate remain unchanged > within > the same 1-day window? > > Similarly (compounded) for a 365-day window aggregating over a 30 day > window: if it filters out early fires, wouldn't it only produce new/unique > results every 30 days? > > I very well may have misunderstood this solution. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-flink-user-mailing-list-archive.2336050.n4.nabble.com/Firing-windows-multiple-times-tp8424p8994.html > Sent from the Apache Flink User Mailing List archive. mailing list archive > at Nabble.com. >
