[FLINK-24329][connector/pulsar] Fix PulsarSourceITCase fails due to port conflict

[xmarker]

What is the purpose of the change

Fix PulsarSourceITCase fails due to port conflict

Brief change log

• PulsarMockRuntime use runtime dynamic port

Verifying this change

(Please pick either of the following options)

This change is to fix unit test failed issue .

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

• Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
• The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (no)
• The serializers: (no)
• The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (no)
• Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: (no)
• The S3 file system connector: (no)

Documentation

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

[flinkbot]

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 25ccc21 (Sat Sep 18 08:55:00 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

• No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!
• This pull request references an unassigned Jira ticket. According to the code contribution guide, tickets need to be assigned before starting with the implementation work.

_{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]

CI report:

• 79d47d6 UNKNOWN
• 0414dbd 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

[zentol]

There's an unused import, and if this change works then the PordBindingUtils can be removed.

[syhily]

There's an unused import, and if this change works then the PordBindingUtils can be removed.

I have checked the internal logic on the Pulsar side. Change the port to zero should work for both Pulsar broker and Pulsar WebService. Tks for your fix.

[syhily]

@xmarker PortBindingUtils should also be removed.

[xmarker]

@xmarker PortBindingUtils should also be removed.

Hi syhily , thinks for review，I checked again and PortBindingUtils import has been removed by the second commit

[syhily]

@xmarker PortBindingUtils should also be removed.

Hi syhily , thinks for review，I checked again and PortBindingUtils import has been removed by the second commit

I mean, remove the PortBindingUtils class.

[xmarker]

@xmarker PortBindingUtils should also be removed.

Hi syhily , thinks for review，I checked again and PortBindingUtils import has been removed by the second commit

I mean, remove the PortBindingUtils class.

OK, I pushed again