Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DA3210265 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:45:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 9383 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 13:45:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-flink-dev-archive@flink.apache.org Received: (qmail 9319 invoked by uid 500); 28 Apr 2015 13:45:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@flink.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@flink.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@flink.apache.org Received: (qmail 9308 invoked by uid 99); 28 Apr 2015 13:45:32 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:45:32 +0000 Received: from mail-qc0-f176.google.com (mail-qc0-f176.google.com [209.85.216.176]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id B73591A0449 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 13:45:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qcrf4 with SMTP id f4so70217091qcr.0 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:45:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.55.31.168 with SMTP id n40mr19826011qkh.56.1430228730748; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:45:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.53.202 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 06:45:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <3B3BC794-5FC2-4F6E-A88C-1D61B9BF47CF@apache.org> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 15:45:30 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Change semantics of print() to "eager" From: Till Rohrmann To: dev@flink.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1147913071bbcb0514c913a4 --001a1147913071bbcb0514c913a4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +1 On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Maximilian Michels wrote: > +1 Very nice addition. > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Stephan Ewen 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 > > 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 > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 for the breaking change > > > > > > > > 2015-04-28 13:18 GMT+02:00 Ufuk Celebi : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28 Apr 2015, at 12:31, Stephan Ewen wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for the breaking change > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's not to this any more than necessary, bu this is a good > > case... > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --001a1147913071bbcb0514c913a4--