Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BEAM-12164]: use the end timestamp for progress estimation in batch jobs #17443

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Apr 29, 2022

Conversation

hengfengli
Copy link
Contributor

@hengfengli hengfengli commented Apr 22, 2022

The logic of the progress calculation is:

  • If the end timestamp is specified, then use it to estimate the remaining work via endTimestamp - lastClaimedPosition.
  • Otherwise, use now() - lastClaimedPosition as the remaining work.

This PR also includes a change to use Timestamp.now() for the throughput updates instead of using the event timestamp.

@asf-ci
Copy link

asf-ci commented Apr 22, 2022

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

2 similar comments
@asf-ci
Copy link

asf-ci commented Apr 22, 2022

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@asf-ci
Copy link

asf-ci commented Apr 22, 2022

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@hengfengli
Copy link
Contributor Author

Run Java PreCommit

@thiagotnunes
Copy link
Contributor

Run Java PostCommit

@pabloem
Copy link
Member

pabloem commented Apr 29, 2022

LGTM. Thanks!

@pabloem pabloem merged commit 7d42baa into apache:master Apr 29, 2022
jrmccluskey pushed a commit to jrmccluskey/beam that referenced this pull request May 3, 2022
…amp for progress estimation in batch jobs

* [BEAM-12164]: use the end timestamp for progress estimation in batch jobs

* Use Timestamp.now() to update the throughput estimator.

* Fix the issue that range.getTo() should be Timestamp.MAX_VALUE for
the streaming case.

* Fix the unit test.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants