[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stable and comprehensible #10685

banmoy · 2019-12-25T08:56:08Z

What is the purpose of the change

Refactor bucketing sink e2e test to make it more stable and comprehensible.

Brief change log

For BucketingSinkTestProgram, set inactiveBucketCheckInterval and inactiveBucketThreshold to 2000 and 4000 respectively
only count records in part-* files to get total valid data
remove "sleep 10" between two failover to make it comprehensible

Verifying this change

Existing e2e test.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (yes / no)
The serializers: (yes / no / don't know)
The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes / no / don't know)
Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / no / don't know)
The S3 file system connector: (yes / no / don't know)

Documentation

Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)

flinkbot · 2019-12-25T08:59:14Z

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 18d9268 (Wed Dec 25 08:59:14 UTC 2019)

Warnings:

No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

_{Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.}

Review Progress

❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.

The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

@flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
@flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
@flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
@flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
@flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

flinkbot · 2019-12-25T09:19:45Z

CI report:

18d9268 Azure: SUCCESS
d2686ed Travis: SUCCESS Azure: SUCCESS
ce56c02 Travis: SUCCESS Azure: SUCCESS

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

@flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
@flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

banmoy · 2019-12-25T16:03:54Z

@flinkbot run travis

banmoy · 2019-12-26T16:32:25Z

@flinkbot run azure

banmoy · 2020-01-03T07:59:07Z

@flinkbot run travis

…e and comprehensible

banmoy · 2020-01-07T07:31:46Z

@kl0u Can you help to review this PR? Thanks

aljoscha · 2020-01-08T12:03:51Z

@kl0u is currently on vacation but I'm sure he'll have a look once he's back.

kl0u

Thanks for working on this @banmoy ! In general changes look good. I had some minor comments. Do you think that the same change can be applied to the StreamingFileSink end-to-end test?

kl0u · 2020-01-15T15:00:19Z

...eting-sink-test/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/tests/BucketingSinkTestProgram.java

@@ -74,8 +74,8 @@ public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
 				.setBucketer(new KeyBucketer())
 				.setBatchSize(Long.MAX_VALUE)
 				.setBatchRolloverInterval(Long.MAX_VALUE)
-				.setInactiveBucketCheckInterval(Long.MAX_VALUE)
-				.setInactiveBucketThreshold(Long.MAX_VALUE);
+				.setInactiveBucketCheckInterval(2000)


Why not setting the values to something smaller so that the test runs faster?

kl0u · 2020-01-15T15:01:06Z

flink-end-to-end-tests/test-scripts/test_streaming_bucketing.sh

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ function get_total_number_of_valid_lines {
  # this method assumes that pending files contain valid data.


The comment is now invalid as we do not assume that pending files have valid data anymore.

kl0u · 2020-01-15T15:01:31Z

flink-end-to-end-tests/test-scripts/test_streaming_bucketing.sh

@@ -150,7 +148,7 @@ wait_job_terminal_state ${JOB_ID} "CANCELED"
 echo "Job $JOB_ID was cancelled, time to verify"

 # get all lines in pending or part files


The comment is now invalid as we do not get the lines in the pending files.

banmoy · 2020-01-15T16:17:55Z

@kl0u Thanks for your review. In StreamingFileSink end-to-end test, OnCheckpointRollingPolicy ensures in-progress part files will be rolled to part files finally, so I think there is no need to enable inactive check. I update the PR, and please have a look.

banmoy · 2020-01-16T01:48:24Z

travis on ce56c02 failed with BackPressureITCase which is tracked in FLINK-15247, and rerun travis.

banmoy · 2020-01-16T01:48:43Z

@flinkbot run travis

kl0u · 2020-01-16T09:43:01Z

Thanks for the work @banmoy ! Merged it

rmetzger added the review=description? label Dec 25, 2019

rmetzger added component=Connectors/FileSystem component=Tests labels Dec 25, 2019

[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stabl…

d2686ed

…e and comprehensible

banmoy force-pushed the flink-14843 branch from 18d9268 to d2686ed Compare January 7, 2020 07:29

kl0u self-assigned this Jan 15, 2020

kl0u requested changes Jan 15, 2020

View reviewed changes

remove useless comments and make inactive interval smaller

ce56c02

kl0u approved these changes Jan 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

kl0u closed this Jan 16, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stable and comprehensible #10685

[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stable and comprehensible #10685

banmoy commented Dec 25, 2019

flinkbot commented Dec 25, 2019

flinkbot commented Dec 25, 2019 •

edited

banmoy commented Dec 25, 2019

banmoy commented Dec 26, 2019

banmoy commented Jan 3, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 7, 2020

aljoscha commented Jan 8, 2020

kl0u left a comment

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 15, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 16, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 16, 2020

kl0u commented Jan 16, 2020

		@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ function get_total_number_of_valid_lines {
		# this method assumes that pending files contain valid data.

		@@ -150,7 +148,7 @@ wait_job_terminal_state ${JOB_ID} "CANCELED"
		echo "Job $JOB_ID was cancelled, time to verify"

		# get all lines in pending or part files

Navigation Menu

[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stable and comprehensible #10685

[FLINK-14843][e2e] Refactor bucketing sink test to make it more stable and comprehensible #10685

Conversation

banmoy commented Dec 25, 2019

What is the purpose of the change

Brief change log

Verifying this change

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

Documentation

flinkbot commented Dec 25, 2019

Automated Checks

Review Progress

flinkbot commented Dec 25, 2019 • edited

CI report:

banmoy commented Dec 25, 2019

banmoy commented Dec 26, 2019

banmoy commented Jan 3, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 7, 2020

aljoscha commented Jan 8, 2020

kl0u left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kl0u Jan 15, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

banmoy commented Jan 15, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 16, 2020

banmoy commented Jan 16, 2020

kl0u commented Jan 16, 2020

flinkbot commented Dec 25, 2019 •

edited