afedulov commented on code in PR #656:
URL:
https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/pull/656#discussion_r1303469585
##########
flink-kubernetes-operator/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/operator/config/KubernetesOperatorConfigOptions.java:
##########
@@ -321,7 +336,32 @@ public static String operatorConfigKey(String key) {
+ "but to complement them in special
cases. For instance, a "
+ "full checkpoint might need to be
occasionally triggered to "
+ "break the chain of incremental
checkpoints and consolidate "
- + "the partial incremental files.");
+ + "the partial incremental files. "
+ + "WARNING: not intended to be used
together with the cron-based "
+ + "periodic checkpoint triggering");
+
+ @Documentation.Section(SECTION_DYNAMIC)
+ public static final ConfigOption<String> PERIODIC_CHECKPOINT_CRON =
+ operatorConfig("periodic.checkpoint.cron")
+ .stringType()
+ .defaultValue(
+ "0 0 0 29 2 ? 1999") // Default value that is
guaranteed not to trigger (not a leap year)
+ .withDescription(
+ "A cron expression that defines when to
automatically trigger checkpoints. "
+ + "The precise triggering schedule is not
guaranteed, checkpoints will "
+ + "be triggered as part of the regular
reconcile loop. Periodic triggering "
+ + "with frequency higher than the
reconciliation loop "
+ + "("
+ + OPERATOR_RECONCILE_INTERVAL.key()
+ + ") will lead to trigger omissions. "
+ + "NOTE: checkpoints are generally managed
by Flink. This "
+ + "setting isn't meant to replace Flink's
checkpoint settings, "
+ + "but to complement them in special
cases. For instance, a "
+ + "full checkpoint might need to be
occasionally triggered to "
+ + "break the chain of incremental
checkpoints and consolidate "
+ + "the partial incremental files. "
+ + "WARNING: not intended to be used
together with the interval-based "
+ + "periodic checkpoint triggering");
Review Comment:
@mxm
> For the sake of simplifying this, could we unify both options under
periodic.{checkpoint,savepoint}.interval?
I am not against it, but see the following downsides:
- We won’t be able to tell if the user misspelled something in the duration
format or her cron expression is invalid. Since Quartz supports both 6- and
7-positional expressions, it can get confusing sometimes when `?` or `*` are
used in the "wrong" place. Some combinations are invalid, but we won't able to
point at the error with the cron format, since there is a possibility that the
user wanted to specify Duration to begin with, but made a mistake there.
- The name would become a bit awkward:
`periodic.{checkpoint|savepoint}.interval` , whereas cron does not necessarily
represent an interval, but can also be a point-in-time setting. This probably
leads to the necessity to deprecate the already-released
`periodic.savepoint.interval`
- Although the absolutely valid intention is to make things simpler for the
user, the complexity of explaining the "Eierlegende Milchwollsau" functionality
of the single setting in the docs plus the unclear naming seem to work against
this intention.
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
