[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13929?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Till Rohrmann updated FLINK-13929:
----------------------------------
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
> Revisit REST & JM URL
> ----------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-13929
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13929
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Runtime / Configuration, Runtime / Coordination
> Reporter: Zili Chen
> Priority: Minor
>
> Currently we have several issues on URL(i.e., ADDRESS and PORT)
> configurations of REST(WebMonitor) and JM(DispatcherRMComponent).
> # Client side code should only retrieve REST PORT but for historical reasons
> we sometimes pass JM PORT. And this doesn't become a problem because some of
> them are unused while others JM PORT is incorrectly set with REST PORT value
> so we do incorrectly twice but conclude in success.
> # Generally speaking, back to the design of
> [FLIP-6|https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=65147077],
> there is no concept named {{WebMonitor}}. The responsibility to communicate
> with client is covered by {{Dispatcher}}. So it seems no argument to separate
> {{JobManagerOptions.ADDRESS}} and {{RestOptions.ADDRESS}}. Besides, we
> unfortunately use different PORT because REST server uses a netty connection
> while JM requires an actor system which has to bind to another port.
> Theoretically all message can be passed via the same port, either we handle
> REST requests in Akka scope or handle RPC in netty scope, so that this
> "two-port" requirement is hopefully not required then.
> # nit: Deprecated config {{WebOptions.PORT}} still in use at
> {{YarnEntrypointUtils.loadConfiguration}}. This should be easily resolved by
> replaced with {{RestOptions.PORT}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
