Skip to content

[hotfix] Remove mention of SplittableTimers in favor of InterruptibleTimers #26666

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 10, 2025

Conversation

nateab
Copy link
Contributor

@nateab nateab commented Jun 10, 2025

These timers were first named SplittableTimers but they were eventually changed to InterruptibleTimers in the this FLIP https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-443%3A+Interruptible+timers+firing

This PR cleans up the leftover mentions of SplittableTimers to prevent confusion

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
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Jun 10, 2025

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

@gustavodemorais
Copy link
Contributor

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

.getOptional(CheckpointingOptions.ENABLE_UNALIGNED_INTERRUPTIBLE_TIMERS)
.ifPresent(this::enableUnalignedCheckpointsInterruptibleTimers);
.getOptional(CheckpointingOptions.ENABLE_UNALIGNED_SPLITTABLE_TIMERS)
.ifPresent(this::enableUnalignedCheckpointsSplitttableTimers);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: enableUnalignedCheckpointsSplitttableTimers has 3 ts here - typo?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

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

@@ -113,9 +113,8 @@ private static Stream<TestSpec<?>> specs() {
.whenSetFromFile(
"execution.checkpointing.unaligned.interruptible-timers.enabled",
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oops needs to update this too

@nateab nateab changed the title [hotfix] Remove isUnalignedCheckpointsInterruptibleTimersEnabled config [hotfix] Rename isUnalignedCheckpointsInterruptibleTimersEnabled config Jun 17, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added community-reviewed PR has been reviewed by the community. and removed community-reviewed PR has been reviewed by the community. labels Jun 30, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added community-reviewed PR has been reviewed by the community. and removed community-reviewed PR has been reviewed by the community. labels Jul 4, 2025
@nateab nateab changed the title [hotfix] Rename isUnalignedCheckpointsInterruptibleTimersEnabled config [hotfix] Remove mention of SplittableTimers in favor of InterruptibleTimers Jul 9, 2025
@nateab nateab requested a review from pnowojski July 9, 2025 22:00
@pnowojski pnowojski merged commit 9bdad62 into apache:master Jul 10, 2025
@pnowojski
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks, yes that makes sense.

@nateab nateab deleted the nateab/patch-1 branch July 10, 2025 08:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
community-reviewed PR has been reviewed by the community.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants