> On Jan. 5, 2016, 10:09 p.m., Balu Vellanki wrote: > > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/AbstractRerunHandler.java, > > line 72 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/41926/diff/2/?file=1181893#file1181893line72> > > > > If entity is defined, the wfEngine should be the workflow endpoint > > defined in the cluster of this entity. If for any reason getting this > > wfEngine fails, shouldnt we propagate the error up to the user? Please help > > me understand why we ignore the exception here... > > pavan kumar kolamuri wrote: > Previously we always used to return the wfengine based on property > defined in startup.properties (workflow.engine.impl). With Native Scheduler > even though this property is oozieworkflow engine, there is chance that > process is scheduled using native scheduler, in that case we should return > workflow engine based on what workflow engine it was scheduled. If it fails > while getting wfengine based on entity it should return default workflow > engine defined in props which is happening previously , thats why for > backward compatibility we should always return default workflow engine.
I don't fully understand the backward compatibility part here. Intention here is going forward entities should be scheduled using Native scheduler even if user doesn't pass the scheduler option in the cmd line? And if there was any error instanting the Native scheduler class then fall back to default wf engine? If so shouldn't this be done in WorkflowEngineFactory.getWorkflowEngine(entity) and not only here. Also lets say this particular entity was scheduled the first time using native scheduler and it failed. Now for rerun if getting wfengine fails and default wf engine is returned wouldn't job execution fail? - Sowmya ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41926/#review112939 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 5, 2016, 12:42 p.m., pavan kumar kolamuri wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/41926/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 5, 2016, 12:42 p.m.) > > > Review request for Falcon. > > > Bugs: FALCON-1719 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FALCON-1719 > > > Repository: falcon-git > > > Description > ------- > > Retry is not updating the state of the instance in the databases > > > Diffs > ----- > > > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/AbstractRerunConsumer.java > 582cb15 > > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/AbstractRerunHandler.java > 64c566e > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/LateRerunConsumer.java > ee31952 > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/LateRerunHandler.java > 64177a4 > rerun/src/main/java/org/apache/falcon/rerun/handler/RetryConsumer.java > 61aa3e1 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/41926/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > pavan kumar kolamuri > >
