Hi In the last email, I just wanted to express that the overall state size(and the access pattern, but I assume that the access pattern is the same between the two states) affects the final performance (which has to do with RocksDB's architecture), and if you use MapState and ValueState to end up with about the same state size on each subtask, then there is no difference at this point
Best, Congxian KristoffSC <krzysiek.chmielew...@gmail.com> 于2020年4月8日周三 下午3:36写道： > Thanks Congxian Qiu, > I'm aware about your second point. In Value state I will keep String or > very > simple POJO, without any collections inside. > > I didn't get your third point, could you clarify it please? > "disk read/write is somewhat about the whole state size" > > Actually what I will keep in Value state is what it would be kept in single > MapState entry. Depends what key I will choose, my state can be "broader" > where I will use MapState, or can be very narrow so I will be able to use > Value state that will keep actually only one entry. > > This is the essence of my question , what are the trade offs here. > > > > > -- > Sent from: > http://apache-flink-user-mailing-list-archive.2336050.n4.nabble.com/ >
