1996fanrui commented on code in PR #22985:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/22985#discussion_r1322842642


##########
flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/scheduler/adaptive/Executing.java:
##########
@@ -124,17 +154,33 @@ private void handleDeploymentFailure(ExecutionVertex 
executionVertex, JobExcepti
 
     @Override
     public void onNewResourcesAvailable() {
-        maybeRescale();
+        rescaleWhenCooldownPeriodIsOver();
     }
 
     @Override
     public void onNewResourceRequirements() {
-        maybeRescale();
+        rescaleWhenCooldownPeriodIsOver();
     }
 
     private void maybeRescale() {
-        if (context.shouldRescale(getExecutionGraph())) {
-            getLogger().info("Can change the parallelism of job. Restarting 
job.");
+        final Duration timeSinceLastRescale = timeSinceLastRescale();
+        rescaleScheduled = false;
+        final boolean shouldForceRescale =
+                (scalingIntervalMax != null)
+                        && (timeSinceLastRescale.compareTo(scalingIntervalMax) 
> 0)
+                        && (lastRescale != Instant.EPOCH); // initial rescale 
is not forced
+        if (shouldForceRescale || context.shouldRescale(getExecutionGraph())) {
+            if (shouldForceRescale) {
+                getLogger()
+                        .info(
+                                "Time since last rescale ({}) >  {} ({}). 
Force-changing the parallelism of the job. Restarting the job.",
+                                timeSinceLastRescale,
+                                
JobManagerOptions.SCHEDULER_SCALING_INTERVAL_MAX.key(),
+                                scalingIntervalMax);
+            } else {
+                getLogger().info("Can change the parallelism of the job. 
Restarting the job.");
+            }
+            lastRescale = Instant.now();
             context.goToRestarting(
                     getExecutionGraph(),

Review Comment:
   > It is by design of the min-parallelism-increase that we don't change
   
   This design was changed for case1, right? 
   
   If yes, the `scalingIntervalMax` wants to ignore the 
`min-parallelism-increase` if one job doesn't rescale for a long time. I think 
the semantic of scalingIntervalMax should be fixed to the user side and should 
not be related to the calling order in the code or the order in which resources 
arrive.



-- 
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]

Reply via email to