You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@flink.apache.org by Jark Wu <im...@gmail.com> on 2019/11/24 12:44:30 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Disable conversion between TIMESTAMP and Long in
parameters and results of UDXs
Hi,
+1 to disable it in 1.10. I think it's time to disable and correct the
behavior now.
Also cc'ed user mailing list to have broader audiences.
Best,
Jark
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 16:59, Timo Walther <tw...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 for disabling it in the Blink planner. Once FLIP-65 is implemented
> and a UDX is registered with the new
> TableEnvironment.createTemporaryFunction() we will also have the
> possibility to be fully compliant with the new type system because we
> can advertise a new UDF stack with new behavior.
>
> Also the mentioned documentation page will be updated as part of FLIP-65.
>
> Regards,
> Timo
>
>
> On 22.11.19 11:08, Jingsong Li wrote:
> > +1 to disable, It is already introduced by new type system in
> TimestampType.
> > I think it is time to update document too.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jingsong Lee
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 6:05 PM Kurt Young <yk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to disable, we also need to highlight this in 1.10 release notes.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Kurt
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 5:56 PM Zhenghua Gao <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I wanted to bring up the discuss of Disable conversion between
> TIMESTAMP
> >>> and Long in parameters and results of UDXs.
> >>>
> >>> Since FLINK-12253[1] introduce the new TimestampType and conversion
> from
> >>> and
> >>> to long is not supported, the UDXs with Long parameters should not
> >> receive
> >>> TIMESTAMP fields and vice versa.
> >>>
> >>> The current situation is we use long as internal representation of
> >>> TIMESTAMP, the legacy planner and blink planner DO NOT DISABLE this
> >>> conversion. Now FLINK-14599[2] would introduce a new internal
> >>> representation of TIMESTAMP and it's time to make a decision to DISABLE
> >> it.
> >>>
> >>> In addition, our document[3] recommends UDXs users use long as
> >>> representation of SQL_TIMESTAMP, which is obsolete too.
> >>>
> >>> Please let me know what you think!
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12253
> >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14599
> >>> [3]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/dev/table/udfs.html#best-practices-for-implementing-udfs
> >>>
> >>> *Best Regards,*
> >>> *Zhenghua Gao*
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Disable conversion between TIMESTAMP and Long in
parameters and results of UDXs
Posted by Zhenghua Gao <do...@gmail.com>.
Since it is unanimously agreed that we should disable conversion between
Timestmap and
long in parameters and results of UDXs, in PR [1] we will disable it in
blink planner. And we
will add a release note in FLINK-14599 [2] of this incompatible
modification.
<https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/10268>
[1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/10268
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14599
*Best Regards,*
*Zhenghua Gao*
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 8:44 PM Jark Wu <im...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 to disable it in 1.10. I think it's time to disable and correct the
> behavior now.
>
> Also cc'ed user mailing list to have broader audiences.
>
> Best,
> Jark
>
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 16:59, Timo Walther <tw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> +1 for disabling it in the Blink planner. Once FLIP-65 is implemented
>> and a UDX is registered with the new
>> TableEnvironment.createTemporaryFunction() we will also have the
>> possibility to be fully compliant with the new type system because we
>> can advertise a new UDF stack with new behavior.
>>
>> Also the mentioned documentation page will be updated as part of FLIP-65.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Timo
>>
>>
>> On 22.11.19 11:08, Jingsong Li wrote:
>> > +1 to disable, It is already introduced by new type system in
>> TimestampType.
>> > I think it is time to update document too.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Jingsong Lee
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 6:05 PM Kurt Young <yk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 to disable, we also need to highlight this in 1.10 release notes.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >> Kurt
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 5:56 PM Zhenghua Gao <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I wanted to bring up the discuss of Disable conversion between
>> TIMESTAMP
>> >>> and Long in parameters and results of UDXs.
>> >>>
>> >>> Since FLINK-12253[1] introduce the new TimestampType and conversion
>> from
>> >>> and
>> >>> to long is not supported, the UDXs with Long parameters should not
>> >> receive
>> >>> TIMESTAMP fields and vice versa.
>> >>>
>> >>> The current situation is we use long as internal representation of
>> >>> TIMESTAMP, the legacy planner and blink planner DO NOT DISABLE this
>> >>> conversion. Now FLINK-14599[2] would introduce a new internal
>> >>> representation of TIMESTAMP and it's time to make a decision to
>> DISABLE
>> >> it.
>> >>>
>> >>> In addition, our document[3] recommends UDXs users use long as
>> >>> representation of SQL_TIMESTAMP, which is obsolete too.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please let me know what you think!
>> >>>
>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12253
>> >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14599
>> >>> [3]
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/dev/table/udfs.html#best-practices-for-implementing-udfs
>> >>>
>> >>> *Best Regards,*
>> >>> *Zhenghua Gao*
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Disable conversion between TIMESTAMP and Long in
parameters and results of UDXs
Posted by Zhenghua Gao <do...@gmail.com>.
Since it is unanimously agreed that we should disable conversion between
Timestmap and
long in parameters and results of UDXs, in PR [1] we will disable it in
blink planner. And we
will add a release note in FLINK-14599 [2] of this incompatible
modification.
<https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/10268>
[1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/10268
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14599
*Best Regards,*
*Zhenghua Gao*
On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 8:44 PM Jark Wu <im...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 to disable it in 1.10. I think it's time to disable and correct the
> behavior now.
>
> Also cc'ed user mailing list to have broader audiences.
>
> Best,
> Jark
>
> On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 at 16:59, Timo Walther <tw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> +1 for disabling it in the Blink planner. Once FLIP-65 is implemented
>> and a UDX is registered with the new
>> TableEnvironment.createTemporaryFunction() we will also have the
>> possibility to be fully compliant with the new type system because we
>> can advertise a new UDF stack with new behavior.
>>
>> Also the mentioned documentation page will be updated as part of FLIP-65.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Timo
>>
>>
>> On 22.11.19 11:08, Jingsong Li wrote:
>> > +1 to disable, It is already introduced by new type system in
>> TimestampType.
>> > I think it is time to update document too.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Jingsong Lee
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 6:05 PM Kurt Young <yk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1 to disable, we also need to highlight this in 1.10 release notes.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >> Kurt
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 5:56 PM Zhenghua Gao <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi,
>> >>>
>> >>> I wanted to bring up the discuss of Disable conversion between
>> TIMESTAMP
>> >>> and Long in parameters and results of UDXs.
>> >>>
>> >>> Since FLINK-12253[1] introduce the new TimestampType and conversion
>> from
>> >>> and
>> >>> to long is not supported, the UDXs with Long parameters should not
>> >> receive
>> >>> TIMESTAMP fields and vice versa.
>> >>>
>> >>> The current situation is we use long as internal representation of
>> >>> TIMESTAMP, the legacy planner and blink planner DO NOT DISABLE this
>> >>> conversion. Now FLINK-14599[2] would introduce a new internal
>> >>> representation of TIMESTAMP and it's time to make a decision to
>> DISABLE
>> >> it.
>> >>>
>> >>> In addition, our document[3] recommends UDXs users use long as
>> >>> representation of SQL_TIMESTAMP, which is obsolete too.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please let me know what you think!
>> >>>
>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12253
>> >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-14599
>> >>> [3]
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-release-1.9/dev/table/udfs.html#best-practices-for-implementing-udfs
>> >>>
>> >>> *Best Regards,*
>> >>> *Zhenghua Gao*
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>