[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7213?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16098286#comment-16098286
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-7213:
---------------------------------------

Github user zentol commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4353#discussion_r129019373
  
    --- Diff: 
flink-contrib/flink-statebackend-rocksdb/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/contrib/streaming/state/RocksDBAsyncSnapshotTest.java
 ---
    @@ -164,8 +168,16 @@ public void acknowledgeCheckpoint(
                                        throw new RuntimeException(e);
                                }
     
    +                           boolean hasKeyedManagedKeyedState = false;
    --- End diff --
    
    -> `hasManagedKeyedState`?


> Introduce state management by OperatorID in TaskManager
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-7213
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-7213
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: State Backends, Checkpointing
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.0
>            Reporter: Stefan Richter
>            Assignee: Stefan Richter
>
> Flink-5892 introduced the job manager / checkpoint coordinator part of 
> managing state on the operator level instead of the task level by introducing 
> explicit operator_id -> state mappings. However, this explicit mapping was 
> not introduced in the task manager side, so the explicit mapping is still 
> converted into a mapping that suits the implicit operator chain order.
> We should also introduce explicit operator ids to state management on the 
> task manager.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to