[GitHub] flink pull request #6096: [FLINK-9440][streaming] Expose cancelation of time...

[tillrohrmann <gi...@git.apache.org>]

Github user tillrohrmann commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6096#discussion_r192976292
  
    --- Diff: flink-streaming-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/api/operators/ProcessOperator.java ---
    @@ -114,12 +114,22 @@ public long currentWatermark() {
     
     		@Override
     		public void registerProcessingTimeTimer(long time) {
    -			throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Setting timers is only supported on a KeyedStream.");
    +			throw new UnsupportedOperationException(UNSUPPORTED_REGISTER_TIMER_MSG);
     		}
     
     		@Override
     		public void registerEventTimeTimer(long time) {
    -			throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Setting timers is only supported on a KeyedStream.");
    +			throw new UnsupportedOperationException(UNSUPPORTED_REGISTER_TIMER_MSG);
    +		}
    +
    +		@Override
    +		public void deleteProcessingTimeTimer(long time) {
    +			throw new UnsupportedOperationException(UNSUPPORTED_DELETE_TIMER_MSG);
    +		}
    +
    +		@Override
    +		public void deleteEventTimeTimer(long time) {
    +			throw new UnsupportedOperationException(UNSUPPORTED_DELETE_TIMER_MSG);
     		}
    --- End diff --
    
    I know it is out of scope, but why do we give access to the `TimerService` in a non-keyed context? Wouldn't it be better to follow the interface-segregation principle a bit more here and expose the timer service only to keyed operators? Is there a reason why we don't do it like that @aljoscha?


---