schongloo opened a new pull request, #1043:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/pull/1043
<!--
*Thank you very much for contributing to the Apache Flink Kubernetes
Operator - we are happy that you want to help us improve the project. To help
the community review your contribution in the best possible way, please go
through the checklist below, which will get the contribution into a shape in
which it can be best reviewed.*
## Contribution Checklist
- Make sure that the pull request corresponds to a [JIRA
issue](https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/issues). Exceptions are
made for typos in JavaDoc or documentation files, which need no JIRA issue.
- Name the pull request in the form "[FLINK-XXXX] [component] Title of the
pull request", where *FLINK-XXXX* should be replaced by the actual issue
number. Skip *component* if you are unsure about which is the best component.
Typo fixes that have no associated JIRA issue should be named following
this pattern: `[hotfix][docs] Fix typo in event time introduction` or
`[hotfix][javadocs] Expand JavaDoc for PuncuatedWatermarkGenerator`.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Make sure that the change passes the automated tests, i.e., `mvn clean
verify` passes. You can read more on how we use GitHub Actions for CI
[here](https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-kubernetes-operator-docs-main/docs/development/guide/#cicd).
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
(including the JIRA id)
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
**(The sections below can be removed for hotfixes of typos)**
-->
## What is the purpose of the change
*This draft PR presents the initial idea for Advanced Coordination for
Blue/Green Deployments.*
*FLIP-503 introduced the Basic Blue/Green Deployment functionality to the
Flink K8s Operator. It was very straightforward, simply transitioning to the
second deployment once it's considered stable. This Advanced version brings
about the notion of "record-level" coordination between the 2 deployments to
have no data duplication and exactly once semantics while preserving a smooth
transition.*
*This functionality is NOT ready for the general public as some edge cases
have only simple workarounds or remain unaddressed. Some examples of this are:*
- *With a Kafka source we're unable to get a full copy of the traffic onto
the 2nd deployment simply by leveraging the state from the other deployment's
savepoint.*
- *From the client-side, the GateProcessFunction simplifies the
communication/writing to the ConfigMap from only 1 subtask; however if there's
no data traffic flowing through that subtask index, no communication from the
pipeline will occur.*
*The main goals of this Draft PR are:*
- *For the community to take a quick look at the current functionality
already mentioned at the Flink Forward 2025 Conference*
- *To get feedback and improvement suggestions.*
## Brief change log
- *Introduced a new TransitionMode in the FlinkDeploymentTemplateSpec
(BASIC/ADVANCED)*
- *In this mode the operator declares a ConfigMap to drive and communicate
with each "pair" of Blue/Green Flink jobs*
- *New GateProcessFunction abstract class defines the overall contract to
implement record level filtering.*
- *Client-side pipelines will communicate with the Blue/Green Controller
via the aforementioned ConfigMap via a new (concrete)
WatermarkGateProcessFunction, which in turn controls the flow of the records.*
- *New module flink-kubernetes-operator-bluegreen-client*, a distributable
artifact with
## Verifying this change
<!--
Please make sure both new and modified tests in this PR follows the
conventions defined in our code quality guide:
https://flink.apache.org/contributing/code-style-and-quality-common.html#testing
-->
This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
- *Added a set of Unit Tests under WatermarkGateProcessFunctionTest*
## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
- Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
- The public API, i.e., is any changes to the `CustomResourceDescriptors`:
(yes / no)
- Core observer or reconciler logic that is regularly executed: (yes / no)
## Documentation
<img width="3684" height="1290" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/ff8d52b9-727a-45de-833a-fa8b67c69af5";
/>
<img width="1086" height="1500" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0a0fba03-74cc-4b6c-b1ee-3a14e200ef60";
/>
--
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]
