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-13663][e2e] Double curl retries count and total time for Kafka downloads #9429

Conversation

@1u0
Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 13, 2019

What is the purpose of the change

Double retries count and total retries time for Kafka downloads as an attempt to make some e2e tests fail due to failure during tests setup.

Verifying this change

This change is a trivial rework / code cleanup without any test coverage.

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): (sure)
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (no)
  • The S3 file system connector: (hopefully no)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable)
@1u0

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Aug 13, 2019

@flinkbot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 13, 2019

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 7fcca59 (Fri Aug 23 10:17:57 UTC 2019)

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
@flinkbot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Aug 13, 2019

CI report:

@tillrohrmann

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Aug 14, 2019

Thanks for this fix @1u0. Have you tried to run the SQL Client end-to-end test in a loop (on Travis) to see whether the problem will be solved with this fix?

@1u0

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Aug 14, 2019

Have you tried to run the SQL Client end-to-end test in a loop (on Travis) to see whether the problem will be solved with this fix?

No, only this change as a quick fix attempt with 🤞.

Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

Ok then let's see what happens on Travis. Thanks for this fix @1u0. LGTM. Merging.

tillrohrmann added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2019
… downloads

This closes #9429.
@1u0 1u0 deleted the 1u0:FLINK-13663-increase-curl-retries-for-kafka-downloads branch Aug 14, 2019
becketqin pushed a commit to becketqin/flink that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
4 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.