osdir.com

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping flink-storm?


Hi,

+1 to drop it. It seems that few people use it.

Best, Hequn

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:22 PM Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> I'm very much in favor of dropping it.
>
> Flink has been continually growing in terms of features, and IMO we've
> reached the point where we should cull some of the more obscure ones.
> flink-storm, while interesting from a theoretical standpoint, offers too
> little value.
>
> Note that the bolt/spout wrapper parts of the part are still compatible,
> it's only topologies that aren't working.
>
> IMO compatibility layers only add value if they ease the migration to
> Flink APIs.
> * bolt/spout wrappers do this, but they will continue to work even if we
> drop it
> * topologies don't do this, so I'm not interested in then.
>
> On 28.09.2018 15:22, Till Rohrmann wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I would like to discuss how to proceed with Flink's storm
> > compatibility layer flink-strom.
> >
> > While working on removing Flink's legacy mode, I noticed that some
> > parts of flink-storm rely on the legacy Flink client. In fact, at the
> > moment flink-storm does not work together with Flink's new distributed
> > architecture.
> >
> > I'm also wondering how many people are actually using Flink's Storm
> > compatibility layer and whether it would be worth porting it.
> >
> > I see two options how to proceed:
> >
> > 1) Commit to maintain flink-storm and port it to Flink's new architecture
> > 2) Drop flink-storm
> >
> > I doubt that we can contribute it to Apache Bahir [1], because once we
> > remove the legacy mode, this module will no longer work with all newer
> > Flink versions.
> >
> > Therefore, I would like to hear your opinion on this and in particular
> > if you are using or planning to use flink-storm in the future.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/apache/bahir-flink
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Till
>
>
>