echauchot edited a comment on pull request #13040:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13040#issuecomment-672843805


   > Thanks for the PR @echauchot
   > 
   > I think the changes are correct in general, I've left some comments in 
code.
   > 
   > Besides that, I have some general remarks:
   > 
   > 1. Please make sure CI build passes (see @flinkbot comments). I think you 
missed the license in a new file.
   > 2. Cleanup commit history (see also [changes 
guide](https://flink.apache.org/contributing/code-style-and-quality-pull-requests.html))
   >    remove reverted, e.g. `de8197`
   >    squash, e.g. `06c763`
   >    make each commit correct, e.g. 
`numberOfCleaningCheckpointsSupplier.get() > maxQueuedRequests` check in 
`05f1cb`
   >    probably it's easier to have just one commit? I think the changes 
aren't so big and are related
   > 3. I think we can re-structure the code so that ZKStore doesn't depend on 
`CheckpointCleaner`; for this, include a call to `CheckpointCleaner` into 
`CompletedCheckpoint.discardCallback`
   > 4. These tests are missing:
   > 
   > * unit tests for `CheckpointsCleaner`
   > * test  that checkpoint request is triggered after deletion completes
   
   Thanks Roman for the detailed review and also for your suggestions 
throughout the design ! 
   1. Yes I saw the RAT failure in Azure CI build, it did not show up using the 
verify maven phase when I launched the build locally, that is why I forgot it :)
   2. yes I left separate commits to ease the review (allow to isolate parts 
corresponding to comments in the design doc and isolate further review 
commits). My plan was indeed to do all the squashing at the end of the review. 
This can definitely be a single commit as the changes are bound to only one 
module and do not change the public API etc...
   3. Ah, you mean calling increment in the executor threads not in the other 
thread ? See https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/13040#discussion_r469246313
   4.  it is just a delegate for checkpoint async tasks which are already 
tested in ZooKeeperCompletedCheckpointStoreTest, PendingCheckpoint. The only 
thing added is the counter inc/dec. I added a test only for 
CheckpointRequestDeciderTest to test that when threshold is exceeded, there is 
no CP request triggered and that there is one when the counter decreases. 
   Isn't the UTest you want the test  that checkpoint request is triggered 
after deletion completes ?


----------------------------------------------------------------
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]


Reply via email to