[FLINK-25465][state] Correct the logic of materizating wrapped changelog state

[Myasuka]

What is the purpose of the change

ChangelogKeyedStateBackend#keyValueStatesByName would store wrapped state, such as TTL state or latency tracking state. It will throw exception on initMaterialization if wrapped:

for (InternalKvState<K, ?, ?> changelogState : keyValueStatesByName.values()) {
           checkState(changelogState instanceof ChangelogState);
           ((ChangelogState) changelogState).resetWritingMetaFlag();
}

Brief change log

• Correct the logic in changelog keyed state backend.

Verifying this change

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

• Added test testMaterializedRestoreWithWrappedState

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]

CI report:

• 17f52dc Azure: SUCCESS

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[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 f2a4393 (Tue Dec 28 07:26:04 UTC 2021)

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

[curcur]

Change this to Map as well?

[curcur]

Change this to Map as well?

[curcur]

Please either change all three HashMap to Map and put them into a separate hotfix commit
Or Leave it as it is.

[curcur]

accepted with small comments.

Thanks for fixing this!