autophagy opened a new pull request, #28326:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/28326
<!--
*Thank you very much for contributing to Apache Flink - we are happy that
you want to help us improve Flink. 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.*
*Please understand that we do not do this to make contributions to Flink a
hassle. In order to uphold a high standard of quality for code contributions,
while at the same time managing a large number of contributions, we need
contributors to prepare the contributions well, and give reviewers enough
contextual information for the review. Please also understand that
contributions that do not follow this guide will take longer to review and thus
typically be picked up with lower priority by the community.*
## 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 set up Azure Pipelines CI to do that following [this
guide](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Azure+Pipelines#AzurePipelines-Tutorial:SettingupAzurePipelinesforaforkoftheFlinkrepository).
- 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 PR adds support for `Context`, `OnTimerContext`, `TimeContext`, timer
registration and firing, watermark management, and `rowtime` support to the PTF
Test Harness.
When a PTF registers a timer, the timer is stored in the TimerManager and
keyed by the partition row. When the user advances the watermark using
either `setWatermark` or `setWatermarkForTable`, the manager then fires all
pending timers below or equal to the watermark in a deterministic order.
I moved per-invocation state stuff into an `InvocationContext` to make
separation of concerns a little easier to follow.
Rows emitted from onTimer firings get the `rowtime` column, and the PTF
rejects at the point of registration if the user tries to register a timer with
`PASS_COLUMNS_THROUGH`
enabled (similar to live, per the `PROCESS_INVALID_PASS_THROUGH_TIMERS` test
on live.)
One open question I have is that there's an edge case where if a user's
`onTimer` registers a new timer at or before the current watermark, it then
fires, and then registers,
then fires, etc. Should there be some sort of max depth check here?
## Brief change log
- Added support for `Context`, `OnTimerContext`, `TimeContext` in
`ProcessTableFunctionTestHarness`
- Added support for timer registration, watermark tracking and timer firing
in `ProcessTableFunctionTestHarness`
- Added an `InvocationContext` to capture per-invocation state to simplify
the collector logic
- Reworked derriving the output type from the system inference to account
for `on_time` and `uid`
- Fixed an issue in `createStateConverter` where the incorrect state
converters were being used for Map/List state.
## Verifying this change
This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
- Added tests to `ProcessFunctionTestHarnessesTest` to cover timer firing,
watermark advancement and context.
## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
- Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
- The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with
`@Public(Evolving)`: (no)
- The serializers: (no)
- The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (no)
- Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its
components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: (no)
- The S3 file system connector: (no)
## Documentation
- Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes)
- If yes, how is the feature documented? (docs)
---
##### Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
<!--
If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this PR,
please
change the checkbox below to `[X]` followed by the name of the tool, and
uncomment the
"Generated-by" line. See the ASF Generative Tooling Guidance for details:
https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html
You are responsible for the quality and correctness of every change in this
PR
regardless of the tooling used. Low-effort AI-generated PRs will be closed.
See
AGENTS.md for the full guidance.
-->
- [x] Yes (please specify the tool below)
2.1.156 (Claude Code)
--
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]
