StefanRRichter commented on a change in pull request #8322: [FLINK-12364] Introduce a CheckpointFailureManager to centralized manage checkpoint failure URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/8322#discussion_r282403473
########## File path: flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/checkpoint/CheckpointFailureManager.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,103 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more + * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with + * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. + * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 + * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with + * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint; + +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger; + +import static org.apache.flink.util.Preconditions.checkArgument; +import static org.apache.flink.util.Preconditions.checkNotNull; + +/** + * The checkpoint failure manager which centralized manage checkpoint failure processing logic. + */ +public class CheckpointFailureManager { + + private final static int MAXIMUM_TOLERABLE_FAILURE_NUMBER = Integer.MAX_VALUE; + + private final AtomicInteger continuousFailureCounter; + private final int tolerableCpFailureNumber; + private final FailureHandlerCallback failureCallback; + + public CheckpointFailureManager(int tolerableCpFailureNumber, FailureHandlerCallback failureCallback) { Review comment: So from our previous discussion, it seems like `FailureHandlerCallback failureCallback` was moved from `handleCheckpointException` to the constructor. It also looks like the only purpose that we will use this is providing a method to fail the job to the `CheckpointFailureManager`. Maybe we should then also just document it that way, and this does not truly justify a concept by itself and could just be `Runnable` instead? I mean we would give a class or even just variable name, wouldn't something along `failJobCallback` make more sense? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
