[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13750?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16911184#comment-16911184
]
TisonKun commented on FLINK-13750:
----------------------------------
Hi Till!
It also comes to me hours ago that ClusterClient should only hold
WebMonitorRetriever and WebMonitorRetriever should be only held by
ClusterClient, and then request to ConnectionInfo is forwarded to Dispatcher by
WebMonitor the same as other requests. I'm really inspired we are in the same
way.
Given the (Client)HighAvailabilityServices differs between RestClusterClient
and MiniClusterClient I would prefer remove the field highAvailabilityServices
and shift down the relevant implementations to subclasses. For
RestClusterClient, it would be quite similar to your description; while for
MiniClusterClient we can access proper service with
miniCluster.getHighAvailabilityServices.(It is an embedded one and the whole
mini cluster must run in the same process. Thus create a new service looks
unnecessary and break how embedded service is implemented)
> Separate HA services between client-/ and server-side
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-13750
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13750
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Command Line Client, Runtime / Coordination
> Reporter: Chesnay Schepler
> Assignee: TisonKun
> Priority: Major
>
> Currently, we use the same {{HighAvailabilityServices}} on the client and
> server. However, the client does not need several of the features that the
> services currently provide (access to the blobstore or checkpoint metadata).
> Additionally, due to how these services are setup they also require the
> client to have access to the blob storage, despite it never actually being
> used, which can cause issues, like FLINK-13500.
> [~Tison] Would be be interested in this issue?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.2#803003)
