Skip to main content

Multi-Engine Data Processing and Federated Workflows with Apache Wayang

Image
By


Organizations increasingly have data distributed across multiple systems: databases, data lakes, streams, warehouses and external services. Traditional pipelines require separate code for each engine, creating fragmentation and duplicated logic.

Project Objective

Provide a unified way to define data-flow logic once, and allow the execution engine to decide where and how to run it across multiple platforms.

Technology: Apache Wayang®

Apache Wayang is a cross-platform processing engine.
A user writes a pipeline once; Wayang:

  • analyzes the logical plan
  • chooses the optimal execution engine(s)
  • executes across supported backends (databases, Spark, Flink etc.)
  • maintains consistency and abstraction

Site: https://wayang.apache.org/
Blog article: https://www.novatechflow.com/2025/06/what-are-performance-implications-of.html

Case Study: Federated Multi-Engine Execution

A data flow may need to combine:

  • relational data in PostgreSQL
  • streaming data from Kafka
  • analytical queries on a Spark or Flink backend
  • data-lake writes into Iceberg

Traditionally, this requires multiple pipelines. With Wayang, a single logical plan can be executed across all of them.

Implementation Notes

  • Logical plan translated into WayangPlan.
  • Optimizer selects execution backends based on cost, data size and operator characteristics.
  • Runtime dispatches tasks to the appropriate engine.
  • Provides measurable gains when data lives across multiple platforms.

Benefits

  • Single code path across heterogeneous systems.
  • Better performance through cross-engine optimization.
  • Reduced duplication of data-flow code.
  • Natural integration for federated or distributed datasets.


Looking to build something similar?

→ See my Services

→ Book a call

→ Contact me



Most read articles

Building a Model-Agnostic Multi-Agent System with OpenClaw

By
Over one week we rebuilt our AI stack around OpenClaw’s multi-agent architecture to avoid provider lock-in and stop wasting premium tokens. By aligning models to tasks, diversifying fallbacks across providers, enforcing minimal tool access, and switching to memory-first workflows with ephemeral sessions, we reduced token usage per task by about 70% and cut our monthly bill by 77% while improving operational resilience. How We Achieved 77% Cost Reduction and Provider Independence Over the past week, we rebuilt our AI infrastructure around OpenClaw’s multi-agent architecture. The result was a 77% cost reduction , provider independence , and a delegation system that routes work to the most cost-effective model for each job. Below is the technical journey of optimizing a 7-agent squad with OpenClaw. The Challenge: Model Provider Lock-In We started with a simple problem: our entire squad defaulted to a single model provider. This created three issues: Cost inefficiency beca...
Read more

BacNet => MQTT in Production: The Real Cost of Bridging BACnet to MQTT at Scale

By
bacnet2mqtt looks simple in a README and expensive in production. Once BACnet polling, reconnection behavior, stale state, and MQTT publishing collide, teams discover they are not deploying a lightweight adapter but operating infrastructure. This article breaks down where bacnet2mqtt works, where it becomes a bottleneck, and which production patterns reduce the operational damage before incidents, backlogs, and silent data loss turn a building integration into a long-running engineering problem. I inherited a building controls integration problem 18 months ago. Three office floors. 217 BACnet sensors covering temperature, occupancy, and HVAC actuators. The data was trapped inside the building automation network while the business wanted analytics, reporting, and compliance visibility in the data platform. The obvious answer looked easy enough: deploy bacnet2mqtt, bridge BACnet into MQTT, and push the stream into the lakehouse stack. The repository made it sound like a w...
Read more

Why Is Customer Obsession Disappearing?

By
Many companies trade real customer-obsession for automated, low-empathy support. Through examples from Coinbase, PayPal, GO Telecommunications and AT&T, this article shows how reliance on AI chatbots, outsourced call centers, and KPI-driven workflows erodes trust, NPS and customer retention. It argues that human-centric support—treating support as strategic investment instead of cost—is still a core growth engine in competitive markets. It's wild that even with all the cool tech we've got these days, like AI solving complex equations and doing business across time zones in a flash, so many companies are still struggling with the basics: taking care of their customers. The drama around Coinbase's customer support is a prime example of even tech giants messing up. And it's not just Coinbase — it's a big-picture issue for the whole industry. At some point, the idea of "customer obsession" got replaced with "customer automation," and no...
Read more