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

[FLINK-34994][tests] Ignore unknown task checkpoint confirmation log in JobIDLoggingITCase #24611

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 3, 2024

Conversation

rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

(For example: This pull request makes task deployment go through the blob server, rather than through RPC. That way we avoid re-transferring them on each deployment (during recovery).)

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 make sure both new and modified tests in this PR follows the conventions defined in our code quality guide: https://flink.apache.org/contributing/code-style-and-quality-common.html#testing

(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 cluster 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, 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)

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan requested a review from XComp April 3, 2024 08:26
Copy link
Contributor

@XComp XComp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 👍 CI isn't working right now (see FLINK-34999).

@rkhachatryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks!
Merging

@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan merged commit f86c080 into apache:master Apr 3, 2024
@rkhachatryan rkhachatryan deleted the f34994 branch April 3, 2024 21:50
@XComp
Copy link
Contributor

XComp commented Apr 4, 2024

Ok, I would have waited for us to fix FLINK-34999. :-D Anyway, (for documentation purposes) the GHA action workflow in your fork for this branch passed as well. The same applies for your test in master after the PR was merged: https://dev.azure.com/apache-flink/apache-flink/_build/results?buildId=58716&view=results

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants