You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flink.apache.org by Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> on 2019/08/14 11:42:23 UTC

[DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Hi all,

As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
there seems to be
no objection to remove it.

Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
through a FLIP and
this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.

Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its removal.

Cheers,
Kostas

link to FLIP-52 :
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637

[1] https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Till Rohrmann <tr...@apache.org>.
+1

Cheers,
Till

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:50 PM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:

> +1
>
> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways to
> do things" is a good idea.
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
> > there seems to be
> > no objection to remove it.
> >
> > Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
> > through a FLIP and
> > this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
> >
> > Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
> > removal.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Kostas
> >
> > link to FLIP-52 :
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Biao Liu <mm...@gmail.com>.
+1

Thanks Kostas for pushing this.

Thanks,
Biao /'bɪ.aʊ/



On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 at 16:03, Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks a lot for the quick response!
> I will consider the Flink Accepted and will start working on it.
>
> Cheers,
> Kostas
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 5:29 AM SHI Xiaogang <sh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > Glad that programming with flink becomes simpler and easier.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Xiaogang
> >
> > Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午11:31写道：
> >
> > > +1 (for the same reasons I posted on the other thread)
> > >
> > > > On 14. Aug 2019, at 15:03, Zili Chen <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > It could be regarded as part of Flink client api refactor.
> > > > Removal of stale code paths helps reason refactor.
> > > >
> > > > There is one thing worth attention that in this thread[1] Thomas
> > > > suggests an interface with a method return JobGraph based on the
> > > > fact that REST API and in per job mode actually extracts the JobGraph
> > > > from user program and submit it instead of running user program and
> > > > submission happens inside the program in session scenario.
> > > >
> > > > Such an interface would be like
> > > >
> > > > interface Program {
> > > >  JobGraph getJobGraph(args);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, the discussion above could be continued in that thread.
> > > > Current Program is a legacy class that quite less useful than it
> should
> > > be.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > tison.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/REST-API-JarRunHandler-More-flexibility-for-launching-jobs-td31026.html#a31168
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午7:50写道：
> > > >
> > > >> +1
> > > >>
> > > >> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two
> ways
> > > to
> > > >> do things" is a good idea.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi all,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated
> and
> > > >>> there seems to be
> > > >>> no objection to remove it.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should
> pass
> > > >>> through a FLIP and
> > > >>> this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that
> purpose.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with
> its
> > > >>> removal.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cheers,
> > > >>> Kostas
> > > >>>
> > > >>> link to FLIP-52 :
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
> > > >>>
> > > >>> [1]
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com>.
Thanks a lot for the quick response!
I will consider the Flink Accepted and will start working on it.

Cheers,
Kostas

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 5:29 AM SHI Xiaogang <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> Glad that programming with flink becomes simpler and easier.
>
> Regards,
> Xiaogang
>
> Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午11:31写道：
>
> > +1 (for the same reasons I posted on the other thread)
> >
> > > On 14. Aug 2019, at 15:03, Zili Chen <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > It could be regarded as part of Flink client api refactor.
> > > Removal of stale code paths helps reason refactor.
> > >
> > > There is one thing worth attention that in this thread[1] Thomas
> > > suggests an interface with a method return JobGraph based on the
> > > fact that REST API and in per job mode actually extracts the JobGraph
> > > from user program and submit it instead of running user program and
> > > submission happens inside the program in session scenario.
> > >
> > > Such an interface would be like
> > >
> > > interface Program {
> > >  JobGraph getJobGraph(args);
> > > }
> > >
> > > Anyway, the discussion above could be continued in that thread.
> > > Current Program is a legacy class that quite less useful than it should
> > be.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/REST-API-JarRunHandler-More-flexibility-for-launching-jobs-td31026.html#a31168
> > >
> > >
> > > Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午7:50写道：
> > >
> > >> +1
> > >>
> > >> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways
> > to
> > >> do things" is a good idea.
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>> As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
> > >>> there seems to be
> > >>> no objection to remove it.
> > >>>
> > >>> Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
> > >>> through a FLIP and
> > >>> this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
> > >>>
> > >>> Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
> > >>> removal.
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>> Kostas
> > >>>
> > >>> link to FLIP-52 :
> > >>>
> > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
> > >>>
> > >>> [1]
> > >>>
> > >>
> > https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by SHI Xiaogang <sh...@gmail.com>.
+1

Glad that programming with flink becomes simpler and easier.

Regards,
Xiaogang

Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午11:31写道：

> +1 (for the same reasons I posted on the other thread)
>
> > On 14. Aug 2019, at 15:03, Zili Chen <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > It could be regarded as part of Flink client api refactor.
> > Removal of stale code paths helps reason refactor.
> >
> > There is one thing worth attention that in this thread[1] Thomas
> > suggests an interface with a method return JobGraph based on the
> > fact that REST API and in per job mode actually extracts the JobGraph
> > from user program and submit it instead of running user program and
> > submission happens inside the program in session scenario.
> >
> > Such an interface would be like
> >
> > interface Program {
> >  JobGraph getJobGraph(args);
> > }
> >
> > Anyway, the discussion above could be continued in that thread.
> > Current Program is a legacy class that quite less useful than it should
> be.
> >
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/REST-API-JarRunHandler-More-flexibility-for-launching-jobs-td31026.html#a31168
> >
> >
> > Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午7:50写道：
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways
> to
> >> do things" is a good idea.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
> >>> there seems to be
> >>> no objection to remove it.
> >>>
> >>> Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
> >>> through a FLIP and
> >>> this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
> >>>
> >>> Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
> >>> removal.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Kostas
> >>>
> >>> link to FLIP-52 :
> >>>
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>>
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Aljoscha Krettek <al...@apache.org>.
+1 (for the same reasons I posted on the other thread)

> On 14. Aug 2019, at 15:03, Zili Chen <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> It could be regarded as part of Flink client api refactor.
> Removal of stale code paths helps reason refactor.
> 
> There is one thing worth attention that in this thread[1] Thomas
> suggests an interface with a method return JobGraph based on the
> fact that REST API and in per job mode actually extracts the JobGraph
> from user program and submit it instead of running user program and
> submission happens inside the program in session scenario.
> 
> Such an interface would be like
> 
> interface Program {
>  JobGraph getJobGraph(args);
> }
> 
> Anyway, the discussion above could be continued in that thread.
> Current Program is a legacy class that quite less useful than it should be.
> 
> Best,
> tison.
> 
> [1]
> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/REST-API-JarRunHandler-More-flexibility-for-launching-jobs-td31026.html#a31168
> 
> 
> Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午7:50写道：
> 
>> +1
>> 
>> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways to
>> do things" is a good idea.
>> 
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
>>> there seems to be
>>> no objection to remove it.
>>> 
>>> Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
>>> through a FLIP and
>>> this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
>>> 
>>> Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
>>> removal.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Kostas
>>> 
>>> link to FLIP-52 :
>>> 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
>>> 
>>> [1]
>>> 
>> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
>>> 
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Zili Chen <wa...@gmail.com>.
+1

It could be regarded as part of Flink client api refactor.
Removal of stale code paths helps reason refactor.

There is one thing worth attention that in this thread[1] Thomas
suggests an interface with a method return JobGraph based on the
fact that REST API and in per job mode actually extracts the JobGraph
from user program and submit it instead of running user program and
submission happens inside the program in session scenario.

Such an interface would be like

interface Program {
  JobGraph getJobGraph(args);
}

Anyway, the discussion above could be continued in that thread.
Current Program is a legacy class that quite less useful than it should be.

Best,
tison.

[1]
http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/REST-API-JarRunHandler-More-flexibility-for-launching-jobs-td31026.html#a31168


Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> 于2019年8月14日周三 下午7:50写道：

> +1
>
> the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways to
> do things" is a good idea.
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
> > there seems to be
> > no objection to remove it.
> >
> > Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
> > through a FLIP and
> > this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
> >
> > Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
> > removal.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Kostas
> >
> > link to FLIP-52 :
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-52: Remove legacy Program interface.

Posted by Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>.
+1

the "main" method is the overwhelming default. getting rid of "two ways to
do things" is a good idea.

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 1:42 PM Kostas Kloudas <kk...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As discussed in [1] , the Program interface seems to be outdated and
> there seems to be
> no objection to remove it.
>
> Given that this interface is PublicEvolving, its removal should pass
> through a FLIP and
> this discussion and the associated FLIP are exactly for that purpose.
>
> Please let me know what you think and if it is ok to proceed with its
> removal.
>
> Cheers,
> Kostas
>
> link to FLIP-52 :
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=125308637
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/x/thread.html/7ffc9936a384b891dbcf0a481d26c6d13b2125607c200577780d1e18@%3Cdev.flink.apache.org%3E
>