[hotfix] Rename isUnalignedCheckpointsInterruptibleTimersEnabled config

[nateab]

Seems to be a copy paste typo, this PR correctly specifies the appropriate config flag isUnalignedCheckpointsSplittableTimersEnabled

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 follow the conventions for tests defined in our code quality guide.

(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)

[flinkbot]

CI report:

• ef397a6 Azure: FAILURE

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[gustavodemorais]

Hey, you need to rebase since we had an issue on master

[davidradl]

nit: enableUnalignedCheckpointsSplitttableTimers has 3 ts here - typo?

[nateab]

ha yes, I dont want to introduce another typo while trying to fix a typo

[davidradl]

I assume existing configs will break - if they were using the old values. I know it is experimental - but can we help the user here. Maybe if they use the old value then they should get an error.

I only see execution.checkpointing.unaligned.interruptible-timers.enabled defined once in master - why do you think this is a cut and paste error?

[nateab]

We have an internal fork of Flink and I noticed that we only used the splittable config instead of the interruptible config. I figured that maybe something went wrong when @pnowojski open sourced this feature. Piotr can you confirm whether we should be using splittable or interruptible here, because right now they are intermixed like on this line https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26666/files#diff-35fa4795524db4fca98cd404f3184bf9ec2a903d673f49074a1ab970733aa0eaL1261-L1262

[nateab]

maybe instead of renaming the config execution.checkpointing.unaligned.interruptible-timers.enabled, a smaller change would be to replace the use of splittable with interruptible, like on the line above.

[nateab]

oops needs to update this too