Initial implementation of a bridge between Flink and GRPC #199
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fpacifici
force-pushed
the
fpacifici/flink_worker
branch
from
70d0ea8 to
3ad1397
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An alternative approach to use Flink that leverages the Datastream API V2 present in flink 2.1.
The application topology is native flink.
All processing steps containing applicaiton logic delegate this work to a GRPC service that represent the node.
If this was viable in terms of performance (PyFlink already kind of work like this)
we should be able to decouple the application workers while keeping all the Flink
features regarding sources, sinks, state, watermarks and checkpoints.
Moreover if the node has a GRPC interface we can plug applicaiton logic written in any language.