[DISCUSS] Removing Non-Keyed WindowOperator

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Removing Non-Keyed WindowOperator

Aljoscha Krettek-2
Hi folks,
I opened a Jira Issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3614

This is the text of the issue:
I propose to remove the special Non-Keyed Window Operator and implement non-parallel windows by using the standard WindowOperator with a dummy KeySelector.

Maintaining everything for two WindowOperators is a huge burden. The implementation is completely separate by now. For example, the Non-Keyed window operator does not use the StateBackend for state, i.e. cannot use RocksDB. Also, with upcoming changes (Merging/Session windows, aligned windows) this will only increase the maintenance burden.

Also, the fast AlignedProcessingTimeWindows operators also only support the Parallel/Keyed case.

Would anyone be opposed to me removing the non-keyed window operator?

Cheers,
Aljoscha
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Removing Non-Keyed WindowOperator

Ufuk Celebi-2
I'm not too familiar with this part of Flink, but your arguments
certainly make sense.

Are there any performance differences to be expected?

– Ufuk

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> I opened a Jira Issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3614
>
> This is the text of the issue:
> I propose to remove the special Non-Keyed Window Operator and implement non-parallel windows by using the standard WindowOperator with a dummy KeySelector.
>
> Maintaining everything for two WindowOperators is a huge burden. The implementation is completely separate by now. For example, the Non-Keyed window operator does not use the StateBackend for state, i.e. cannot use RocksDB. Also, with upcoming changes (Merging/Session windows, aligned windows) this will only increase the maintenance burden.
>
> Also, the fast AlignedProcessingTimeWindows operators also only support the Parallel/Keyed case.
>
> Would anyone be opposed to me removing the non-keyed window operator?
>
> Cheers,
> Aljoscha
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Removing Non-Keyed WindowOperator

Ufuk Celebi-2
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Ufuk Celebi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Are there any performance differences to be expected?

To clarify: I don't think that it would be a blocker expect for if it
had a yuge impact.

– Ufuk