If you are using 1.11 new changelog format, I think it will retract old value from old partition correctly. If not, (I assume you are using append only changelog) I think it won't retract old value.
lec ssmi <shicheng31...@gmail.com> 于2020年7月1日周三 下午2:39写道： > The old value is already counted in a partition, and when the above update > occurs, will the count value of the old partition be subtracted by 1, and > then added to the new partition? > > Benchao Li <libenc...@apache.org> 于2020年7月1日周三 下午1:11写道： > >> Hi lec ssmi, >> >> > If the type value of a record is updated in the database, the values >> before and after the update will be divided into different partitions and >> handed over to different operators for calculation. >> I think your understanding is correct. >> >> > Can Retraction happen correctly? >> I didn't get your point, can you elaborate your question a little bit? >> >> lec ssmi <shicheng31...@gmail.com> 于2020年7月1日周三 上午9:54写道： >> >>> Hi: >>> When we use sql for aggregation operation, for example, the following >>> sql >>> >>>> select count( distinct name) cnt, type from table group by type >>> >>> >>> Source data can be regarded as bin log data. >>> If the type value of a record is updated in the database, the values >>> before and after the update will be divided into different partitions and >>> handed over to different operators for calculation. Can Retraction happen >>> correctly? >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Best, >> Benchao Li >> > -- Best, Benchao Li
