Skip to content

Conversation

@godfreyhe
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

Separate the implementation of StreamExecDeduplicate

Brief change log

  • Introduce StreamPhysicalDeduplicate, and make StreamExecDeduplicate only extended from ExecNode

Verifying this change

This change is a refactoring rework covered by existing tests.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (yes / no)
  • The serializers: (yes / no / don't know)
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes / no / don't know)
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / no / don't know)
  • The S3 file system connector: (yes / no / don't know)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Jan 13, 2021

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 9bf8957 (Fri May 28 07:07:41 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.

Details
The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Jan 13, 2021

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

Copy link
Contributor

@wenlong88 wenlong88 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, left a reminder to update the out-of-date doc.

* Stream physical RelNode which deduplicate on keys and keeps only first row or last row.
* This node is an optimization of [[StreamPhysicalRank]] for some special cases.
* Compared to [[StreamPhysicalRank]], this node could use mini-batch and access less state.
* <p>NOTES: only supports sort on proctime now, sort on rowtime will not translated into
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the doc is out of date, deduplicate based on rowtime is supported now.

…e, and make StreamExecDeduplicate only extended from ExecNode
@godfreyhe godfreyhe merged commit 500c30c into apache:master Jan 14, 2021
@godfreyhe godfreyhe deleted the FLINK-20948 branch January 14, 2021 13:21
YuvalItzchakov pushed a commit to YuvalItzchakov/flink that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2021
…e, and make StreamExecDeduplicate only extended from ExecNode

This closes apache#14626
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants