osdir.com

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping flink-storm?


+1 to drop it as nobody seems to be willing to maintain it and it also 
stands in the way for future developments in Flink.

Cheers,
Kostas

> On Sep 29, 2018, at 8:19 AM, Tzu-Li Chen <wander4096@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> +1 to drop it.
> 
> It seems few people use it. Commits history of an experimental
> module sparse often means that there is low interest.
> 
> Best,
> tison.
> 
> 
> 远远 <zhao137578346@xxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月29日周六 下午2:16写道:
> 
>> +1, it‘s time to drop it😂
>> 
>> Zhijiang(wangzhijiang999) <wangzhijiang999@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2018年9月29日周六
>> 下午1:53写道:
>> 
>>> Very agree with to drop it. +1
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 发件人:Jeff Carter <jpcarterara@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> 发送时间:2018年9月29日(星期六) 10:18
>>> 收件人:dev <dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> 抄 送:chesnay <chesnay@xxxxxxxxxx>; Till Rohrmann <trohrmann@xxxxxxxxxx>;
>>> user <user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> 主 题:Re: [DISCUSS] Dropping flink-storm?
>>> 
>>> +1 to drop it.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 7:25 PM Hequn Cheng <chenghequn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>