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-6861][metrics] Use OperatorID in metric system #4849

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

zentol
Copy link
Contributor

@zentol zentol commented Oct 18, 2017

What is the purpose of the change

This PR introduces Operator IDs to the metric system.

Brief change log

  • store OperatorID in OperatorMetricGroup
    • for the batch API, this ID is equal to the JobVertexID of the task
    • modify TaskMetricGroup to store a JobVertexID instead of AbstractID (required for conversion of task ID to operator ID)
  • update OperatorScopeFormat to also accept the operator ID
  • update documentation

Verifying this change

This change is already covered by existing tests, such as OperatorGroupTest#testVariables.

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, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (no)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes)
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? (docs)

@aljoscha
Copy link
Contributor

The changes look good! Is there any test that checks using all those different variables, i.e. that would check that I can use the operator id in a scope pattern?

@zentol
Copy link
Contributor Author

zentol commented Oct 23, 2017

@aljoscha I've added a test. see OperatorGroupTest#testGenerateScopeCustom.

@aljoscha
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks! This looks good now.

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