[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5892?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16054070#comment-16054070
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-5892:
---------------------------------------
Github user pnowojski commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3844#discussion_r122718852
--- Diff:
flink-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/test/state/operator/restore/keyed/KeyedJob.java
---
@@ -98,10 +98,9 @@ public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
.map(new StatefulStringStoringMap(mode, "first"))
.setParallelism(4);
- // TODO: re-enable this when generating the actual 1.2 savepoint
- //if (mode == ExecutionMode.MIGRATE || mode ==
ExecutionMode.RESTORE) {
- map.uid("first");
- //}
+ if (mode == ExecutionMode.MIGRATE || mode ==
ExecutionMode.RESTORE) {
--- End diff --
I somehow don't like it that is not explained in the commit message what
has actually changed/why was this change required at all. Especially since you
have not changed anything else in the code, it is difficult to understand that.
If nothing else has changed, why do we need this `if (...)`? If something has
changed, shouldn't it be covered by some test?
> Recover job state at the granularity of operator
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-5892
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5892
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: State Backends, Checkpointing
> Reporter: Guowei Ma
> Assignee: Guowei Ma
> Fix For: 1.3.0
>
>
> JobGraph has no `Operator` info so `ExecutionGraph` can only recovery at the
> granularity of task.
> This leads to the result that the operator of the job may not recover the
> state from a save point even if the save point has the state of operator.
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19suTRF0nh7pRgeMnIEIdJ2Fq-CcNVt5_hR3cAoICf7Q/edit#.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
