[FLINK-11662] Disable task to fail on checkpoint errors

[Myasuka]

What is the purpose of the change

FLINK-11662 has been a known and urgent issue after Flink-1.8 release. There exist two parts to fix this problem, one is from task side to disable task to fail on checkpoint errors. Another part is to let JM to decide when to fail the whole job which has been part of work in #8322.

This PR mainly focus on the task side and choose to base on #8322 before it merged since that is very unlikely to still have significant changes at this point. Once #8322 merged, this PR would then rebased on the latest code.

Brief change log

• Deprecate isFailTaskOnCheckpointError and setFailTaskOnCheckpointError in ExecutionConfig.
• Deprecate isFailOnCheckpointingErrors and setFailOnCheckpointingErrors in CheckpointConfig.
• Remove FailingCheckpointExceptionHandler

Verifying this change

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

• Refactor CheckpointExceptionHandlerConfigurationTest and CheckpointExceptionHandlerTest to verify the default logic changed.
• Refactor StreamTaskTest to verify the default logic changed on task side.

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): yes
• 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
• The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
• If yes, how is the feature documented? JavaDocs

[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.

Review Progress

• ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
• ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
• ❗ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • Needs attention by @StefanRRichter
• ❓ 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

[Myasuka]

@flinkbot attention @StefanRRichter

[StefanRRichter]

For most parts, changes look good to me, with some smaller comments. However, in the current form the PR can break existing setups because it ignores the user's with from the deprecated flag. I would suggest to i) have the deprecated flag influence the number of tolerable checkpoint errors (0 or unlimited) and ii) have the new flag always overrule the old flag if used together and maybe iii) log a warning if they are used together.

[StefanRRichter]

Thanks for the good work @Myasuka ! Changes look good, merging.