[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9560?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16512184#comment-16512184
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-9560:
---------------------------------------
Github user pnowojski commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6149#discussion_r195340311
--- Diff: docs/ops/filesystems.md ---
@@ -102,8 +102,8 @@ fs.<scheme>.limit.input: (number, 0/-1 mean no limit)
fs.<scheme>.limit.output: (number, 0/-1 mean no limit)
fs.<scheme>.limit.timeout: (milliseconds, 0 means infinite)
fs.<scheme>.limit.stream-timeout: (milliseconds, 0 means infinite)
-fs.<scheme>.limit.rateLimitingInput: (bytes/s, 0 means infinite)
-fs.<scheme>.limit.rateLimitingOutput: (bytes/s, 0 means infinite)
+fs.<scheme>.limit.input-rate-limit: (bytes/s, 0 means infinite . By
default, there is no limits)
--- End diff --
`there is no limit` (limit instead of limits)
And sorry for confusion, but I just noticed that word `limit` occurs twice
in property name. It would be enough to name it:
`fs.<scheme>.limit.input-rate`
and
`fs.<scheme>.limit.output-rate`
Sorry for previous comment in wrong direction!
> RateLimiting for FileSystem
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-9560
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-9560
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: FileSystem
> Affects Versions: 1.5.0
> Reporter: Etienne CARRIERE
> Priority: Major
>
> *Pain*: On our system, we see that during checkpoint , all the bandwidth is
> take to send the checkpoint to object storage (s3 in our case)
> *Proposal* : After the creation of some limitation on Filesystem (mostly
> number of connections with the tickets FLINK-8125/FLINK-8198/FLINK-9468), I
> propose to add ratelimiting "per Filesystem" .
> *Proposal of implementation* : Modify LimitedConnectionsFileSystem to add a
> ratelimiter on both Input and OutputStream.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
