flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Change semantics of print() to "eager"
Date Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:45:30 GMT
+1

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Maximilian Michels <mxm@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 Very nice addition.
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Sounds good, Max, let's to this in one fix.
> >
> > We can maintain a counter in the ExecutionEnvironment that tracks how
> many
> > executions have happened.
> > In case of no prior execution, simply warn that no sinks are defined.
> > In case a prior execution happened, point out that nothing new is pending
> > execution.
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Maximilian Michels <mxm@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree, print should print on the client. However, let's introduce
> some
> > > big hint in the error message in case of a second execute() that this
> > error
> > > may arise from a previous execution.
> > >
> > > Instead of "No sinks defined", let's print "The Flink job didn't
> contain
> > > any sinks. This may be because the sinks were already executed. If you
> > > executed the print() method on a DataSet before, the job would have
> > already
> > > been executed. In this case, remove the call of execute() until you
> have
> > > defined further sinks".
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhueske@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for the breaking change
> > > >
> > > > 2015-04-28 13:18 GMT+02:00 Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 28 Apr 2015, at 12:31, Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for the breaking change
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's not to this any more than necessary, bu this is a good
> > case...
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message