Skip to content

Conversation

@darionyaphet
Copy link
Contributor

@darionyaphet darionyaphet commented Oct 15, 2020

What is the purpose of the change

Since Java 7, we can use try-resource to manage IO Stream which could auto close when it finished. This one is more concise

Brief change log

(for example:)

  • The TaskInfo is stored in the blob store on job creation time as a persistent artifact
  • Deployments RPC transmits only the blob storage reference
  • TaskManagers retrieve the TaskInfo from the blob cache

Verifying this change

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

(or)

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as (please describe tests).

(or)

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

(example:)

  • Added integration tests for end-to-end deployment with large payloads (100MB)
  • Extended integration test for recovery after master (JobManager) failure
  • Added test that validates that TaskInfo is transferred only once across recoveries
  • Manually verified the change by running a 4 node cluser with 2 JobManagers and 4 TaskManagers, a stateful streaming program, and killing one JobManager and two TaskManagers during the execution, verifying that recovery happens correctly.

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, Kubernetes/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
Copy link
Collaborator

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 28db73e (Thu Oct 15 06:30:22 UTC 2020)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!
  • Invalid pull request title: No valid Jira ID provided

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.

Details
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
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Oct 15, 2020

CI report:

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

@zentol
Copy link
Contributor

zentol commented Oct 15, 2020

While using try-with-resource is certainly preferable, the unfortunate reality is that the future of the scala-shell module is uncertain. As such I would reject this contribution for the time being, because a any time invested here might be for naught.

@zentol zentol self-assigned this Oct 15, 2020
@darionyaphet
Copy link
Contributor Author

Do we have any plans in scala-shell module?

@zentol
Copy link
Contributor

zentol commented Oct 16, 2020

@darionyaphet The problem is that the scala-shell is currently not compatible with scala 2.12 (FLINK-10911), and it's only a matter of time until support for scala 2.11 is dropped.

@darionyaphet
Copy link
Contributor Author

@darionyaphet The problem is that the scala-shell is currently not compatible with scala 2.12 (FLINK-10911), and it's only a matter of time until support for scala 2.11 is dropped.

OK depressed and this one I have closed

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.

4 participants