Github user zentol commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/4802#discussion_r144016836
--- Diff:
flink-clients/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/client/CliFrontend.java ---
@@ -420,89 +420,72 @@ protected int list(String[] args) {
}
try {
- ActorGateway jobManagerGateway =
getJobManagerGateway(options);
-
- LOG.info("Connecting to JobManager to retrieve list of
jobs");
- Future<Object> response = jobManagerGateway.ask(
-
JobManagerMessages.getRequestRunningJobsStatus(),
- clientTimeout);
+ CustomCommandLine<?> activeCommandLine =
getActiveCustomCommandLine(options.getCommandLine());
+ ClusterClient client =
activeCommandLine.retrieveCluster(options.getCommandLine(), config,
configurationDirectory);
- Object result;
+ Collection<JobDetails> jobDetails;
try {
- result = Await.result(response, clientTimeout);
- }
- catch (Exception e) {
- throw new Exception("Could not retrieve running
jobs from the JobManager.", e);
+ CompletableFuture<Collection<JobDetails>>
jobDetailsFuture = client.listJobs();
--- End diff --
Even if we change how we retrieve it we can still wrap them in a JobDetails
object; it doesn't necessarily leak to the outside how we retrieve them. Given
that the CLI requires the job id, job name, start/end timestamp and job status
we aren't saving much by creating a slimmed down JobDetails class.
---
