"in a robust way" does a lot of work here and works as a weasel word/phrase, i.e. it means whatever the reader wants it to mean (or can be redefined in an argument to suit your purpose).
Why is it that you feel that you couldn't make stream processing that works for your use cases? Is it also that you couldn't do it after some research? Are you one of the juniors/mids that you refer to in your poost?
I'm trying to understand this type of mindset because I've found that overwhelmingly most things can be done to a perfectly acceptable degree and often better than big offerings just from shedding naysayer attitudes and approaching it from first principles. Not to mention the flexibility you get from then owning and understanding the entire thing.
I think you’re taking what I’m saying the opposite of the way I intended it. With enough time and effort, I could probably implement the relevant papers and then use various tools to prove my implementation free of subtle edge cases. But, Flink (and other stream processing frameworks) let me not spend the complexity budget on implementing watermarks, temporal joins and the various other primitives that my application needs. As a result, I can spend more of my complexity budget within my domain and not on implementation details.
Why is it that you feel that you couldn't make stream processing that works for your use cases? Is it also that you couldn't do it after some research? Are you one of the juniors/mids that you refer to in your poost?
I'm trying to understand this type of mindset because I've found that overwhelmingly most things can be done to a perfectly acceptable degree and often better than big offerings just from shedding naysayer attitudes and approaching it from first principles. Not to mention the flexibility you get from then owning and understanding the entire thing.