Skip to content

Conversation

@mxm
Copy link
Contributor

@mxm mxm commented Apr 13, 2015

  • backtracks from the sinks of an ExecutionGraph
  • checks the availability of IntermediatePartitionResults
  • marks ExecutionVertex to be scheduled

This first version of backtracking does not support resume/recovery from
intermediate results yet. It lays the foundation for integrating the
remaining changes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we need the producing execution attempt id as well to uniquely identify a result partition

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The intend here is to lock any available ResulPartition for an IntermediateResultPartitionID, regardless of the ExecutionAttemptID.

@hsaputra
Copy link
Contributor

@mxm could you add more information about this backtracking mode? Is this to support recovery of failed job?

@mxm
Copy link
Contributor Author

mxm commented Apr 15, 2015

Yes @hsaputra. One of the goals is to support resume/recovery of a job from an intermediate result already produced. Another goal is to rework the deploy logic of the ExecutionGraph to schedule tasks in a more optimal way instead of merely deploying them from the source.

The changes in this pull request are a first step towards these goals. The scheduleUsingBacktracking method backtracks from the sinks to the sources while checking for available IntermediateResultPartitions. This can already be used if you replace the ScheduleMode in ExecutionGraph to ScheduleMod.BACKTRACKING. In a next commit, proper locking of the intermediate results and resume will be supported.

@hsaputra
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @mxm, appreciate the additional information about the PR

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why do theses private interfaces (ScheduleActiona and PostBacktrackingHook) being added here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Absolutely right. I was going to change their location before merging. They will probably go into a new class dedicated for the backtracking alongside with the scheduleUsingBacktracking method. I had trouble finding the right spot and decided to leave them there for now.

@mxm
Copy link
Contributor Author

mxm commented Apr 17, 2015

@hsaputra You're welcome. Thanks for the additional feedback.

@mxm mxm force-pushed the backtracking-scheduling branch 2 times, most recently from 4c41ecb to 51edf02 Compare April 17, 2015 15:12
- backtracks from the sinks of an ExecutionGraph
- checks the availability of IntermediatePartitionResults
- marks ExecutionVertex to be scheduled

This first version of backtracking does not support resume/recovery from
intermediate results yet. It lays the foundation for integrating the
remaining changes.
@mxm mxm force-pushed the backtracking-scheduling branch from 51edf02 to 027d4fd Compare April 17, 2015 15:21
@mxm
Copy link
Contributor Author

mxm commented Apr 29, 2015

I'm closing because I opened a new pull request #640.

@mxm mxm closed this Apr 29, 2015
@mxm mxm deleted the backtracking-scheduling branch April 29, 2015 16:25
pnowojski pushed a commit to pnowojski/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2024
…ory (apache#595)

This change removes cc-flink-managed-table module from flink repository. Also, remove its references in this repository. This module is being moved to kdb repository.

Also, removed CompiledPlanJobGraphGeneratorV3ImplTest. It fails currently because we are removing
cc-flink-managed-table module as part of this PR and this test depends on that module.
The test is also present at cc-flink-docker/cc-flink-runtime-integration-impl module.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants