[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21364?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17503240#comment-17503240
]
Jiangjie Qin commented on FLINK-21364:
--------------------------------------
[~stevenz3wu] Sorry for the late response. I somehow missed the notification
email. Personally I feel that we should probably have a separate
{{FinishedSplitsEvent}} regardless whether we piggyback the finishedSplitIds in
the {{{}RequestSplitEvent{}}}. That sounds more of an optimization to save an
event sending when possible.
> piggyback finishedSplitIds in RequestSplitEvent
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-21364
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21364
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Connectors / Common
> Affects Versions: 1.12.1
> Reporter: Steven Zhen Wu
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: auto-deprioritized-major, pull-request-available
>
> For some split assignment strategy, the enumerator/assigner needs to track
> the completed splits to advance watermark for event time alignment or rough
> ordering. Right now, `RequestSplitEvent` for FLIP-27 source doesn't support
> pass-along of the `finishedSplitIds` info and hence we have to create our own
> custom source event type for Iceberg source.
> Here is the proposal of add such optional info to `RequestSplitEvent`.
> {code}
> public RequestSplitEvent(
> @Nullable String hostName,
> @Nullable Collection<String> finishedSplitIds)
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
