[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24124?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17408998#comment-17408998
 ] 

Aitozi commented on FLINK-24124:
--------------------------------

Thanks for reminding me of that, close this one.

> Use explicit pool size to construct thread pool instead of 
> Hardware.getNumberCPUCores()
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-24124
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24124
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Runtime / Coordination
>            Reporter: Aitozi
>            Priority: Major
>
> Same to this 
> [comments|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21685?focusedCommentId=17303866&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17303866].
>  If we calculate the pool size based on hardware information in containerize 
> environment, it will cause the value too small.
> But there are some code still use the {{Hardware.getNumberCPUCores()}} as the 
> thread pool size like in 
> {{JobManagerSharedServices#scheduledExecutorService}} . 
> This pool will be used to do like :
> * dispose checkpoint (which is a I/O work)
> * connection to resourceManager
> * ...
> But we often only set one core for jobManger. This will lead to all the above 
> action can only be executed one by one. So this ticket is meant to use 
> explicit pool size to avoid these problems in containerize environment.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to