Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Ismaël Mejía]

I am coming extremely late to this discussion since the vote already started but
it is great we are finally getting into unification Enthusiast +1. Kudos to
Andrey and the rest of the community for bringing all the useful and different
perspectives.

I just want to bring information on two tickets that were created on parallel to
the discussion that were mostly migrated from the old docker-flink repo that
both Patrick and me have been maintaining for the last 3 years (now repatriated
into the flink-docker repo):

FLINK-16260 Add docker images based on Java 11 (PR ready)
FLINK-16846 Add python docker images

Both are related to the current discussion. The one Java 11 address just the
users wishes. We can see this as a good way to validate our support and offer it
to users but of course this should not be the default image that FLIP-111 will
be based on until the community agrees on it (probably in the future).

The python one definitely deserves more discussion. Today the official Flink
docker images do not contain python so users must extend them to contain python.
Since there are so many nice improvements on Flink for Python, is maybe the time
to release images with python support? This of course brings other questions of
which versions to support and how are we going to test them. So maybe we should
open a specific thread or FLIP on that once FLIP-111 is done.

On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 4:35 AM Canbin Zheng  wrote:
>
> Hi, all,
>
> Thanks for the reply, Andrey!
>
> I have filed two new tickets tracking the problems:
> 1. FLINK-17033  for
> upgrading base Java Docker image, I pointed out some other problems
> the openjdk:8-jre-alpine could have in the ticket‘s description.
> 2. FLINK-17034  for
> suggesting executing the container CMD under TINI.
>
> Regards,
> Canbin Zheng
>
> Andrey Zagrebin  于2020年4月7日周二 下午4:58写道：
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Thanks for the further feedback Niels and Canbin.
> >
> > @Niels
> >
> > I agree with Till, the comments about docker tags are valid concerns and we
> > can discuss them in dedicated ML threads
> > in parallel or after the general unification of Dockerfiles suggested by
> > this FLIP.
> >
> > One thing to add about point 4. The native Kubernetes integration does not
> > support a job mode at the moment.
> > This is not only about the image. As I understand, even if you pack the job
> > artefacts into the image, the native Kubernetes integration will start a
> > session cluster.
> > This will be a follow-up for the native Kubernetes integration.
> > cc @Yang Wang
> >
> > @Canbin
> >
> > I think you raise valid concerns. It makes sense to create JIRA issues for
> > them.
> > One for the alpine image problem and one to suggest the TINI as a blocker
> > for FLINK-15843  and
> > slow pod shutdown.
> > We can discuss and address them in parallel or after the general
> > unification of Dockerfiles suggested by this FLIP.
> >
> > I will start a separate voting thread for this FLIP.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Andrey
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:49 PM Canbin Zheng 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, all
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot for this FLIP and all the fruitable discussion. I am not
> > sure
> > > whether the following questions are in the scope of this FLIP, but I
> > still
> > > expect your reply:
> > >
> > >1. Which docker base image do we plan to use for Java? As far as I
> > >see, openjdk:8-jre-alpine[1] is not officially supported by the
> > OpenJDK
> > >project anymore; openjdk:8-jre is larger than openjdk:8-jre-slim in
> > size so
> > >that we use the latter one in our internal branch and it works fine
> > so far.
> > >2. Is it possible that we execute the container CMD under *TINI*[2]
> > >instead of the shell for better hygiene? As far as I see, the
> > container of
> > >the JM or TMs is running in the shell form and it could not receive
> > the
> > >*TERM* signal when the pod is deleted[3]. Some of the problems are as
> > >follows:
> > >   - The JM and the TMs could have no chance of cleanup, I used to
> > >   create FLINK-15843[4] for tracking this problem.
> > >   - The pod could take a long time(up to 40 seconds) to be deleted
> > >   after the K8s API Server receives the deletion request.
> > >
> > >At the moment, we use *TINI* in our internal branch for the
> > > native K8s setup and it solves the problems mentioned above.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> > https://github.com/docker-library/docs/blob/master/openjdk/README.md#supported-tags-and-respective-dockerfile-links
> > >
> > >
> > https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/3eb0351b208d739fac35345c85e3c6237c2114ec#diff-f95ffa3d134732c33f7b8368e099
> > >  [2]
> > > https://github.com/krallin/tini
> > >  [3]
> > > https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/kill/
> > >  [4]
> > > 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Canbin Zheng]

Hi, all,

Thanks for the reply, Andrey!

I have filed two new tickets tracking the problems:
1. FLINK-17033  for
upgrading base Java Docker image, I pointed out some other problems
the openjdk:8-jre-alpine could have in the ticket‘s description.
2. FLINK-17034  for
suggesting executing the container CMD under TINI.

Regards,
Canbin Zheng

Andrey Zagrebin  于2020年4月7日周二 下午4:58写道：

> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for the further feedback Niels and Canbin.
>
> @Niels
>
> I agree with Till, the comments about docker tags are valid concerns and we
> can discuss them in dedicated ML threads
> in parallel or after the general unification of Dockerfiles suggested by
> this FLIP.
>
> One thing to add about point 4. The native Kubernetes integration does not
> support a job mode at the moment.
> This is not only about the image. As I understand, even if you pack the job
> artefacts into the image, the native Kubernetes integration will start a
> session cluster.
> This will be a follow-up for the native Kubernetes integration.
> cc @Yang Wang
>
> @Canbin
>
> I think you raise valid concerns. It makes sense to create JIRA issues for
> them.
> One for the alpine image problem and one to suggest the TINI as a blocker
> for FLINK-15843  and
> slow pod shutdown.
> We can discuss and address them in parallel or after the general
> unification of Dockerfiles suggested by this FLIP.
>
> I will start a separate voting thread for this FLIP.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrey
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:49 PM Canbin Zheng 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, all
> >
> > Thanks a lot for this FLIP and all the fruitable discussion. I am not
> sure
> > whether the following questions are in the scope of this FLIP, but I
> still
> > expect your reply:
> >
> >1. Which docker base image do we plan to use for Java? As far as I
> >see, openjdk:8-jre-alpine[1] is not officially supported by the
> OpenJDK
> >project anymore; openjdk:8-jre is larger than openjdk:8-jre-slim in
> size so
> >that we use the latter one in our internal branch and it works fine
> so far.
> >2. Is it possible that we execute the container CMD under *TINI*[2]
> >instead of the shell for better hygiene? As far as I see, the
> container of
> >the JM or TMs is running in the shell form and it could not receive
> the
> >*TERM* signal when the pod is deleted[3]. Some of the problems are as
> >follows:
> >   - The JM and the TMs could have no chance of cleanup, I used to
> >   create FLINK-15843[4] for tracking this problem.
> >   - The pod could take a long time(up to 40 seconds) to be deleted
> >   after the K8s API Server receives the deletion request.
> >
> >At the moment, we use *TINI* in our internal branch for the
> > native K8s setup and it solves the problems mentioned above.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://github.com/docker-library/docs/blob/master/openjdk/README.md#supported-tags-and-respective-dockerfile-links
> >
> >
> https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/3eb0351b208d739fac35345c85e3c6237c2114ec#diff-f95ffa3d134732c33f7b8368e099
> >  [2]
> > https://github.com/krallin/tini
> >  [3]
> > https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/kill/
> >  [4]
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15843
> >
> > Regards,
> > Canbin Zheng
> >
> > Till Rohrmann  于2020年4月6日周一 下午5:34写道：
> >
> >> Thanks for the feedback Niels. This is very helpful.
> >>
> >> 1. I agree `flink:latest` is nice to get started but in the long run
> >> people
> >> will want to pin their dependencies to a specific Flink version. I think
> >> the fix will happen as part of FLINK-15794.
> >>
> >> 2. SNAPSHOT docker images will be really helpful for developers as well
> as
> >> users who want to use the latest features. I believe that this will be a
> >> follow-up of this FLIP.
> >>
> >> 3. The goal of FLIP-111 is to create an image which allows to start a
> >> session as well as job cluster. Hence, I believe that we will solve this
> >> problem soon.
> >>
> >> 4. Same as 3. The new image will also contain the native K8s integration
> >> so
> >> that there is no need to create a special image modulo the artifacts you
> >> want to add.
> >>
> >> Additional notes:
> >>
> >> 1. I agree that one log makes it harder to separate different execution
> >> attempts or different tasks. However, on the other hand, it gives you an
> >> overall picture of what's happening in a Flink process. If things were
> >> split apart, then it might become super hard to detect problems in the
> >> runtime which affect the user code to fail or vice versa, for example.
> In
> >> general cross correlation will be harder. I guess a solution could be to
> >> make this configurable. In any case, we should move the discussion about
> >> this topic into a separate thread.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Till
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 6, 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Hi all,

Thanks for the further feedback Niels and Canbin.

@Niels

I agree with Till, the comments about docker tags are valid concerns and we
can discuss them in dedicated ML threads
in parallel or after the general unification of Dockerfiles suggested by
this FLIP.

One thing to add about point 4. The native Kubernetes integration does not
support a job mode at the moment.
This is not only about the image. As I understand, even if you pack the job
artefacts into the image, the native Kubernetes integration will start a
session cluster.
This will be a follow-up for the native Kubernetes integration.
cc @Yang Wang

@Canbin

I think you raise valid concerns. It makes sense to create JIRA issues for
them.
One for the alpine image problem and one to suggest the TINI as a blocker
for FLINK-15843  and
slow pod shutdown.
We can discuss and address them in parallel or after the general
unification of Dockerfiles suggested by this FLIP.

I will start a separate voting thread for this FLIP.

Cheers,
Andrey


On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:49 PM Canbin Zheng  wrote:

> Hi, all
>
> Thanks a lot for this FLIP and all the fruitable discussion. I am not sure
> whether the following questions are in the scope of this FLIP, but I still
> expect your reply:
>
>1. Which docker base image do we plan to use for Java? As far as I
>see, openjdk:8-jre-alpine[1] is not officially supported by the OpenJDK
>project anymore; openjdk:8-jre is larger than openjdk:8-jre-slim in size so
>that we use the latter one in our internal branch and it works fine so far.
>2. Is it possible that we execute the container CMD under *TINI*[2]
>instead of the shell for better hygiene? As far as I see, the container of
>the JM or TMs is running in the shell form and it could not receive the
>*TERM* signal when the pod is deleted[3]. Some of the problems are as
>follows:
>   - The JM and the TMs could have no chance of cleanup, I used to
>   create FLINK-15843[4] for tracking this problem.
>   - The pod could take a long time(up to 40 seconds) to be deleted
>   after the K8s API Server receives the deletion request.
>
>At the moment, we use *TINI* in our internal branch for the
> native K8s setup and it solves the problems mentioned above.
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/docker-library/docs/blob/master/openjdk/README.md#supported-tags-and-respective-dockerfile-links
>
> https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/3eb0351b208d739fac35345c85e3c6237c2114ec#diff-f95ffa3d134732c33f7b8368e099
>  [2]
> https://github.com/krallin/tini
>  [3]
> https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/kill/
>  [4]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15843
>
> Regards,
> Canbin Zheng
>
> Till Rohrmann  于2020年4月6日周一 下午5:34写道：
>
>> Thanks for the feedback Niels. This is very helpful.
>>
>> 1. I agree `flink:latest` is nice to get started but in the long run
>> people
>> will want to pin their dependencies to a specific Flink version. I think
>> the fix will happen as part of FLINK-15794.
>>
>> 2. SNAPSHOT docker images will be really helpful for developers as well as
>> users who want to use the latest features. I believe that this will be a
>> follow-up of this FLIP.
>>
>> 3. The goal of FLIP-111 is to create an image which allows to start a
>> session as well as job cluster. Hence, I believe that we will solve this
>> problem soon.
>>
>> 4. Same as 3. The new image will also contain the native K8s integration
>> so
>> that there is no need to create a special image modulo the artifacts you
>> want to add.
>>
>> Additional notes:
>>
>> 1. I agree that one log makes it harder to separate different execution
>> attempts or different tasks. However, on the other hand, it gives you an
>> overall picture of what's happening in a Flink process. If things were
>> split apart, then it might become super hard to detect problems in the
>> runtime which affect the user code to fail or vice versa, for example. In
>> general cross correlation will be harder. I guess a solution could be to
>> make this configurable. In any case, we should move the discussion about
>> this topic into a separate thread.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Niels Basjes  wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Sorry for jumping in at this late point of the discussion.
>> > I see a lot of things I really like and I would like to put my "needs"
>> and
>> > observations here too so you take them into account (where possible).
>> > I suspect that there will be overlap with things you already have taken
>> > into account.
>> >
>> >1. No more 'flink:latest' docker image tag.
>> >Related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15794
>> >What I have learned is that the 'latest' version of a docker image
>> only
>> >makes sense IFF this is an almost standalone thing.
>> >So if I have a servlet that does something in isolation (like my
>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Canbin Zheng]

Hi, all

Thanks a lot for this FLIP and all the fruitable discussion. I am not sure
whether the following questions are in the scope of this FLIP, but I still
expect your reply:

   1. Which docker base image do we plan to use for Java? As far as I see,
   openjdk:8-jre-alpine[1] is not officially supported by the OpenJDK project
   anymore; openjdk:8-jre is larger than openjdk:8-jre-slim in size so that we
   use the latter one in our internal branch and it works fine so far.
   2. Is it possible that we execute the container CMD under *TINI*[2]
   instead of the shell for better hygiene? As far as I see, the container of
   the JM or TMs is running in the shell form and it could not receive the
   *TERM* signal when the pod is deleted[3]. Some of the problems are as
   follows:
  - The JM and the TMs could have no chance of cleanup, I used to
  create FLINK-15843[4] for tracking this problem.
  - The pod could take a long time(up to 40 seconds) to be deleted
  after the K8s API Server receives the deletion request.

   At the moment, we use *TINI* in our internal branch for the
native K8s setup and it solves the problems mentioned above.

[1]
https://github.com/docker-library/docs/blob/master/openjdk/README.md#supported-tags-and-respective-dockerfile-links

https://github.com/docker-library/openjdk/commit/3eb0351b208d739fac35345c85e3c6237c2114ec#diff-f95ffa3d134732c33f7b8368e099
 [2]
https://github.com/krallin/tini
 [3]
https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/kill/
 [4]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15843

Regards,
Canbin Zheng

Till Rohrmann  于2020年4月6日周一 下午5:34写道：

> Thanks for the feedback Niels. This is very helpful.
>
> 1. I agree `flink:latest` is nice to get started but in the long run people
> will want to pin their dependencies to a specific Flink version. I think
> the fix will happen as part of FLINK-15794.
>
> 2. SNAPSHOT docker images will be really helpful for developers as well as
> users who want to use the latest features. I believe that this will be a
> follow-up of this FLIP.
>
> 3. The goal of FLIP-111 is to create an image which allows to start a
> session as well as job cluster. Hence, I believe that we will solve this
> problem soon.
>
> 4. Same as 3. The new image will also contain the native K8s integration so
> that there is no need to create a special image modulo the artifacts you
> want to add.
>
> Additional notes:
>
> 1. I agree that one log makes it harder to separate different execution
> attempts or different tasks. However, on the other hand, it gives you an
> overall picture of what's happening in a Flink process. If things were
> split apart, then it might become super hard to detect problems in the
> runtime which affect the user code to fail or vice versa, for example. In
> general cross correlation will be harder. I guess a solution could be to
> make this configurable. In any case, we should move the discussion about
> this topic into a separate thread.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Niels Basjes  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Sorry for jumping in at this late point of the discussion.
> > I see a lot of things I really like and I would like to put my "needs"
> and
> > observations here too so you take them into account (where possible).
> > I suspect that there will be overlap with things you already have taken
> > into account.
> >
> >1. No more 'flink:latest' docker image tag.
> >Related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15794
> >What I have learned is that the 'latest' version of a docker image
> only
> >makes sense IFF this is an almost standalone thing.
> >So if I have a servlet that does something in isolation (like my hobby
> >project https://hub.docker.com/r/nielsbasjes/yauaa ) then 'latest'
> > makes
> >sense.
> >With Flink you have the application code and all nodes in the cluster
> >that are depending on each other and as such must run the exact same
> >versions of the base software.
> >So if you run flink in a cluster (local/yarn/k8s/mesos/swarm/...)
> where
> >the application and the nodes inter communicate and closely depend on
> > each
> >other then 'latest' is a bad idea.
> >   1. Assume I have an application built against the Flink N api and
> the
> >   cluster downloads the latest which is also Flink N.
> >   Then a week later Flink N+1 is released and the API I use changes
> >   (Deprecated)
> >   and a while later Flink N+2 is released and the deprecated API is
> >   removed: Then my application no longer works even though I have
> > not changed
> >   anything.
> >   So I want my application to be 'pinned' to the exact version I
> built
> >   it with.
> >   2. I have a running cluster with my application and cluster running
> >   Flink N.
> >   I add some additional nodes and the new nodes pick up the Flink N+1
> >   image ... now I have a cluster with 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Till Rohrmann]

Thanks for the feedback Niels. This is very helpful.

1. I agree `flink:latest` is nice to get started but in the long run people
will want to pin their dependencies to a specific Flink version. I think
the fix will happen as part of FLINK-15794.

2. SNAPSHOT docker images will be really helpful for developers as well as
users who want to use the latest features. I believe that this will be a
follow-up of this FLIP.

3. The goal of FLIP-111 is to create an image which allows to start a
session as well as job cluster. Hence, I believe that we will solve this
problem soon.

4. Same as 3. The new image will also contain the native K8s integration so
that there is no need to create a special image modulo the artifacts you
want to add.

Additional notes:

1. I agree that one log makes it harder to separate different execution
attempts or different tasks. However, on the other hand, it gives you an
overall picture of what's happening in a Flink process. If things were
split apart, then it might become super hard to detect problems in the
runtime which affect the user code to fail or vice versa, for example. In
general cross correlation will be harder. I guess a solution could be to
make this configurable. In any case, we should move the discussion about
this topic into a separate thread.

Cheers,
Till

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:40 AM Niels Basjes  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Sorry for jumping in at this late point of the discussion.
> I see a lot of things I really like and I would like to put my "needs" and
> observations here too so you take them into account (where possible).
> I suspect that there will be overlap with things you already have taken
> into account.
>
>1. No more 'flink:latest' docker image tag.
>Related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15794
>What I have learned is that the 'latest' version of a docker image only
>makes sense IFF this is an almost standalone thing.
>So if I have a servlet that does something in isolation (like my hobby
>project https://hub.docker.com/r/nielsbasjes/yauaa ) then 'latest'
> makes
>sense.
>With Flink you have the application code and all nodes in the cluster
>that are depending on each other and as such must run the exact same
>versions of the base software.
>So if you run flink in a cluster (local/yarn/k8s/mesos/swarm/...) where
>the application and the nodes inter communicate and closely depend on
> each
>other then 'latest' is a bad idea.
>   1. Assume I have an application built against the Flink N api and the
>   cluster downloads the latest which is also Flink N.
>   Then a week later Flink N+1 is released and the API I use changes
>   (Deprecated)
>   and a while later Flink N+2 is released and the deprecated API is
>   removed: Then my application no longer works even though I have
> not changed
>   anything.
>   So I want my application to be 'pinned' to the exact version I built
>   it with.
>   2. I have a running cluster with my application and cluster running
>   Flink N.
>   I add some additional nodes and the new nodes pick up the Flink N+1
>   image ... now I have a cluster with mixed versions.
>   3. The version of flink is really the "Flink+Scala" version pair.
>   If you have the right flink but the wrong scala you get really nasty
>   errors: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-16289
>
>   2. Deploy SNAPSHOT docker images (i.e. something like
>*flink:1.11-SNAPSHOT_2.12*) .
>More and more use cases will be running on the code delivered via Docker
>images instead of bare jar files.
>So if a "SNAPSHOT" is released and deployed into a 'staging' maven repo
>(which may be locally on the developers workstation) then it is my
> opinion
>that at the same moment a "SNAPSHOT" docker image should be
>created/deployed.
>Each time a "SNAPSHOT" docker image is released this will overwrite the
>previous "SNAPSHOT".
>If the final version is released the SNAPSHOTs of that version
>can/should be removed.
>This will make testing in clusters a lot easier.
>Also building a local fix and then running it locally will work without
>additional modifications to the code.
>
>3. Support for a 'single application cluster'
>I've been playing around with the S3 plugin and what I have found is
>that this essentially requires all nodes to have full access to the
>credentials needed to connect to S3.
>This essentially means that a multi-tenant setup is not possible in
>these cases.
>So I think the single application cluster should be a feature available
>in all cases.
>
>4. I would like a native-kubernetes-single-application base image.
>I can then create a derived image where I only add the jar of my
>application.
>My desire is that I can then create a k8s yaml file for kubectl
>that adds the needed configs/secrets/arguments/environment 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Niels Basjes]

Hi all,

Sorry for jumping in at this late point of the discussion.
I see a lot of things I really like and I would like to put my "needs" and
observations here too so you take them into account (where possible).
I suspect that there will be overlap with things you already have taken
into account.

   1. No more 'flink:latest' docker image tag.
   Related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-15794
   What I have learned is that the 'latest' version of a docker image only
   makes sense IFF this is an almost standalone thing.
   So if I have a servlet that does something in isolation (like my hobby
   project https://hub.docker.com/r/nielsbasjes/yauaa ) then 'latest' makes
   sense.
   With Flink you have the application code and all nodes in the cluster
   that are depending on each other and as such must run the exact same
   versions of the base software.
   So if you run flink in a cluster (local/yarn/k8s/mesos/swarm/...) where
   the application and the nodes inter communicate and closely depend on each
   other then 'latest' is a bad idea.
  1. Assume I have an application built against the Flink N api and the
  cluster downloads the latest which is also Flink N.
  Then a week later Flink N+1 is released and the API I use changes
  (Deprecated)
  and a while later Flink N+2 is released and the deprecated API is
  removed: Then my application no longer works even though I have
not changed
  anything.
  So I want my application to be 'pinned' to the exact version I built
  it with.
  2. I have a running cluster with my application and cluster running
  Flink N.
  I add some additional nodes and the new nodes pick up the Flink N+1
  image ... now I have a cluster with mixed versions.
  3. The version of flink is really the "Flink+Scala" version pair.
  If you have the right flink but the wrong scala you get really nasty
  errors: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-16289

  2. Deploy SNAPSHOT docker images (i.e. something like
   *flink:1.11-SNAPSHOT_2.12*) .
   More and more use cases will be running on the code delivered via Docker
   images instead of bare jar files.
   So if a "SNAPSHOT" is released and deployed into a 'staging' maven repo
   (which may be locally on the developers workstation) then it is my opinion
   that at the same moment a "SNAPSHOT" docker image should be
   created/deployed.
   Each time a "SNAPSHOT" docker image is released this will overwrite the
   previous "SNAPSHOT".
   If the final version is released the SNAPSHOTs of that version
   can/should be removed.
   This will make testing in clusters a lot easier.
   Also building a local fix and then running it locally will work without
   additional modifications to the code.

   3. Support for a 'single application cluster'
   I've been playing around with the S3 plugin and what I have found is
   that this essentially requires all nodes to have full access to the
   credentials needed to connect to S3.
   This essentially means that a multi-tenant setup is not possible in
   these cases.
   So I think the single application cluster should be a feature available
   in all cases.

   4. I would like a native-kubernetes-single-application base image.
   I can then create a derived image where I only add the jar of my
   application.
   My desire is that I can then create a k8s yaml file for kubectl
   that adds the needed configs/secrets/arguments/environment variables and
   starts the cluster and application.
   Because the native kubernetes support makes it automatically scale based
   on the application this should 'just work'.

Additional note:

   1. Job/Task attempt logging instead of task manager logging.
   *I realize this has nothing to do with the docker images*
   I found something "hard to work with" while running some tests last week.
   The logging is done to a single log for the task manager.
   So if I have multiple things running in the single task manager then the
   logs are mixed together.
   Also several attempts of the same task are mixed which makes it very
   hard to find out 'what went wrong'.



On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 4:27 PM Ufuk Celebi  wrote:

> Thanks for the summary, Andrey. Good idea to link Patrick's document from
> the FLIP as a future direction so it doesn't get lost. Could you make sure
> to revive that discussion when FLIP-111 nears an end?
>
> This is good to go on my part. +1 to start the VOTE.
>
>
> @Till, @Yang: Thanks for the clarification with the output redirection. I
> didn't see that. The concern with the `tee` approach is that the file would
> grow indefinitely. I think we can solve this with regular logging by
> redirecting stderr to ERROR log level, but I'm not sure. We can look at a
> potential solution when we get to that point. :-)
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:36 PM Andrey Zagrebin 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Patrick and Ufuk, thanks a lot for more ideas and suggestions!
> >
> 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Ufuk Celebi]

Thanks for the summary, Andrey. Good idea to link Patrick's document from
the FLIP as a future direction so it doesn't get lost. Could you make sure
to revive that discussion when FLIP-111 nears an end?

This is good to go on my part. +1 to start the VOTE.


@Till, @Yang: Thanks for the clarification with the output redirection. I
didn't see that. The concern with the `tee` approach is that the file would
grow indefinitely. I think we can solve this with regular logging by
redirecting stderr to ERROR log level, but I'm not sure. We can look at a
potential solution when we get to that point. :-)



On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 3:36 PM Andrey Zagrebin  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Patrick and Ufuk, thanks a lot for more ideas and suggestions!
>
> I have updated the FLIP according to the current state of discussion.
> Now it also contains the implementation steps and future follow-ups.
> Please, review if there are any concerns.
> The order of the steps aims for keeping Flink releasable at any point if
> something does not have enough time to get in.
>
> It looks that we are reaching mostly a consensus for the open questions.
> There is also a list of items, which have been discussed in this thread,
> and short summary below.
> As soon as there are no concerns, I will create a voting thread.
>
> I also added some thoughts for further customising logging setup. This may
> be an optional follow-up
> which is additional to the default logging into files for Web UI.
>
> # FLIP scope
> The focus is users of the official releases.
> Create docs for how to use the official docker image.
> Remove other Dockerfiles in Flink repo.
> Rely on running the official docker image in different modes (JM/TM).
> Customise running the official image with env vars (This should minimise
> manual manipulating of local files and creation of a custom image).
>
> # Base oficial image
>
> ## Java versions
> There is a separate effort for this:
> https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/pull/9
>
> # Run image
>
> ## Entry point modes
> JM session, JM job, TM
>
> ## Entry point config
> We use env vars for this, e.g. FLINK_PROPERTIES and ENABLE_BUILT_IN_PLUGINS
>
> ## Flink config options
> We document the existing FLINK_PROPERTIES env var to override config
> options in flink-conf.yaml.
> Then later, we do not need to expose and handle any other special env vars
> for config options (address, port etc).
> The future plan is to make Flink process configurable by env vars, e.g.
> 'some.yaml.option: val' -> FLINK_SOME_YAML_OPTION=val
>
> ## Extra files: jars, custom logging properties
> We can provide env vars to point to custom locations, e.g. in mounted
> volumes.
>
> # Extend image
>
> ## Python/hadoop versions, activating certain libs/plugins
> Users can install extra dependencies and change configs in their custom
> image which extends our base image.
>
> # Logging
>
> ## Web UI
> Modify the *log4j-console.properties* to also output logs into the files
> for WebUI. Limit log file size.
>
> ## Container output
> Separate effort for proper split of Flink process stdout and stderr into
> files and container output
> (idea with tee command: `program start-foreground &2>1 | tee
> flink-user-taskexecutor.out`)
>
> # Docker bash utils
> We are not going to expose it to users as an API.
> They should be able either to configure and run the standard entry point
> or the documentation should give short examples about how to extend and
> customise the base image.
>
> During the implementation, we will see if it makes sense to factor out
> certain bash procedures
> to reuse them e.g. in custom dev versions of docker image.
>
> # Dockerfile / image for developers
> We keep it on our future roadmap. This effort should help to understand
> what we can reuse there.
>
> Best,
> Andrey
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:57 PM Till Rohrmann 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> just a small inline comment.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:42 AM Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
>>
>> > Hey Yang,
>> >
>> > thanks! See inline answers.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:11 AM Yang Wang  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Ufuk,
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for make the conclusion and directly point out what need to be
>> > done
>> > > in
>> > > FLIP-111. I agree with you that we should narrow down the scope and
>> focus
>> > > the
>> > > most important and basic part about docker image unification.
>> > >
>> > > (1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the
>> job
>> > >> cluster entry point
>> > >
>> > > I want to add a small requirement for the entry point script.
>> Currently,
>> > > for the native
>> > > K8s integration, we are using the apache/flink-docker image, but with
>> > > different entry
>> > > point("kubernetes-entry.sh"). Generate the java cmd in KubernetesUtils
>> > and
>> > > run it
>> > > in the entry point. I really hope it could merge to
>> apache/flink-docker
>> > > "docker-entrypoint.sh".
>> > >
>> >
>> > The script [1] only adds the FLINK_CLASSPATH env var which 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Hi everyone,

Patrick and Ufuk, thanks a lot for more ideas and suggestions!

I have updated the FLIP according to the current state of discussion.
Now it also contains the implementation steps and future follow-ups.
Please, review if there are any concerns.
The order of the steps aims for keeping Flink releasable at any point if
something does not have enough time to get in.

It looks that we are reaching mostly a consensus for the open questions.
There is also a list of items, which have been discussed in this thread,
and short summary below.
As soon as there are no concerns, I will create a voting thread.

I also added some thoughts for further customising logging setup. This may
be an optional follow-up
which is additional to the default logging into files for Web UI.

# FLIP scope
The focus is users of the official releases.
Create docs for how to use the official docker image.
Remove other Dockerfiles in Flink repo.
Rely on running the official docker image in different modes (JM/TM).
Customise running the official image with env vars (This should minimise
manual manipulating of local files and creation of a custom image).

# Base oficial image

## Java versions
There is a separate effort for this:
https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/pull/9

# Run image

## Entry point modes
JM session, JM job, TM

## Entry point config
We use env vars for this, e.g. FLINK_PROPERTIES and ENABLE_BUILT_IN_PLUGINS

## Flink config options
We document the existing FLINK_PROPERTIES env var to override config
options in flink-conf.yaml.
Then later, we do not need to expose and handle any other special env vars
for config options (address, port etc).
The future plan is to make Flink process configurable by env vars, e.g.
'some.yaml.option: val' -> FLINK_SOME_YAML_OPTION=val

## Extra files: jars, custom logging properties
We can provide env vars to point to custom locations, e.g. in mounted
volumes.

# Extend image

## Python/hadoop versions, activating certain libs/plugins
Users can install extra dependencies and change configs in their custom
image which extends our base image.

# Logging

## Web UI
Modify the *log4j-console.properties* to also output logs into the files
for WebUI. Limit log file size.

## Container output
Separate effort for proper split of Flink process stdout and stderr into
files and container output
(idea with tee command: `program start-foreground &2>1 | tee
flink-user-taskexecutor.out`)

# Docker bash utils
We are not going to expose it to users as an API.
They should be able either to configure and run the standard entry point
or the documentation should give short examples about how to extend and
customise the base image.

During the implementation, we will see if it makes sense to factor out
certain bash procedures
to reuse them e.g. in custom dev versions of docker image.

# Dockerfile / image for developers
We keep it on our future roadmap. This effort should help to understand
what we can reuse there.

Best,
Andrey


On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:57 PM Till Rohrmann  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> just a small inline comment.
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:42 AM Ufuk Celebi  wrote:
>
> > Hey Yang,
> >
> > thanks! See inline answers.
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:11 AM Yang Wang  wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ufuk,
> > >
> > > Thanks for make the conclusion and directly point out what need to be
> > done
> > > in
> > > FLIP-111. I agree with you that we should narrow down the scope and
> focus
> > > the
> > > most important and basic part about docker image unification.
> > >
> > > (1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the
> job
> > >> cluster entry point
> > >
> > > I want to add a small requirement for the entry point script.
> Currently,
> > > for the native
> > > K8s integration, we are using the apache/flink-docker image, but with
> > > different entry
> > > point("kubernetes-entry.sh"). Generate the java cmd in KubernetesUtils
> > and
> > > run it
> > > in the entry point. I really hope it could merge to apache/flink-docker
> > > "docker-entrypoint.sh".
> > >
> >
> > The script [1] only adds the FLINK_CLASSPATH env var which seems
> generally
> > reasonable to me. But since principled classpath and entrypoint
> > configuration is somewhat related to the follow-up improvement
> proposals, I
> > could also see this being done after FLIP-111.
> >
> >
> > > (2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
> > >> => support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box
> > >
> > > If you mean to update the "flink-dist/conf/log4j-console.properties" to
> > > support console and
> > > local log files. I will say "+1". But we need to find a proper way to
> > make
> > > stdout/stderr output
> > > both available for console and log files. Maybe till's proposal could
> > help
> > > to solve this.
> > > "`program &2>1 | tee flink-user-taskexecutor.out`"
> > >
> >
> > I think we can simply add a rolling file appender with a limit on the log
> > size.
> >
> > I think this won't solve 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Till Rohrmann]

Hi everyone,

just a small inline comment.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 11:42 AM Ufuk Celebi  wrote:

> Hey Yang,
>
> thanks! See inline answers.
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:11 AM Yang Wang  wrote:
>
> > Hi Ufuk,
> >
> > Thanks for make the conclusion and directly point out what need to be
> done
> > in
> > FLIP-111. I agree with you that we should narrow down the scope and focus
> > the
> > most important and basic part about docker image unification.
> >
> > (1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the job
> >> cluster entry point
> >
> > I want to add a small requirement for the entry point script. Currently,
> > for the native
> > K8s integration, we are using the apache/flink-docker image, but with
> > different entry
> > point("kubernetes-entry.sh"). Generate the java cmd in KubernetesUtils
> and
> > run it
> > in the entry point. I really hope it could merge to apache/flink-docker
> > "docker-entrypoint.sh".
> >
>
> The script [1] only adds the FLINK_CLASSPATH env var which seems generally
> reasonable to me. But since principled classpath and entrypoint
> configuration is somewhat related to the follow-up improvement proposals, I
> could also see this being done after FLIP-111.
>
>
> > (2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
> >> => support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box
> >
> > If you mean to update the "flink-dist/conf/log4j-console.properties" to
> > support console and
> > local log files. I will say "+1". But we need to find a proper way to
> make
> > stdout/stderr output
> > both available for console and log files. Maybe till's proposal could
> help
> > to solve this.
> > "`program &2>1 | tee flink-user-taskexecutor.out`"
> >
>
> I think we can simply add a rolling file appender with a limit on the log
> size.
>
> I think this won't solve Yang's concern. What he wants to achieve is that
STDOUT and STDERR go to STDOUT and STDERR as well as into some *.out and
*.err file which are accessible from the web ui. I don't think that log
appender will help with this problem.

Cheers,
Till


> – Ufuk
>
> [1]
>
> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-dist/src/main/flink-bin/kubernetes-bin/kubernetes-entry.sh
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Ufuk Celebi]

Hey Yang,

thanks! See inline answers.

On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 5:11 AM Yang Wang  wrote:

> Hi Ufuk,
>
> Thanks for make the conclusion and directly point out what need to be done
> in
> FLIP-111. I agree with you that we should narrow down the scope and focus
> the
> most important and basic part about docker image unification.
>
> (1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the job
>> cluster entry point
>
> I want to add a small requirement for the entry point script. Currently,
> for the native
> K8s integration, we are using the apache/flink-docker image, but with
> different entry
> point("kubernetes-entry.sh"). Generate the java cmd in KubernetesUtils and
> run it
> in the entry point. I really hope it could merge to apache/flink-docker
> "docker-entrypoint.sh".
>

The script [1] only adds the FLINK_CLASSPATH env var which seems generally
reasonable to me. But since principled classpath and entrypoint
configuration is somewhat related to the follow-up improvement proposals, I
could also see this being done after FLIP-111.


> (2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
>> => support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box
>
> If you mean to update the "flink-dist/conf/log4j-console.properties" to
> support console and
> local log files. I will say "+1". But we need to find a proper way to make
> stdout/stderr output
> both available for console and log files. Maybe till's proposal could help
> to solve this.
> "`program &2>1 | tee flink-user-taskexecutor.out`"
>

I think we can simply add a rolling file appender with a limit on the log
size.

– Ufuk

[1]
https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-dist/src/main/flink-bin/kubernetes-bin/kubernetes-entry.sh

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yang Wang]

Hi Ufuk,

Thanks for make the conclusion and directly point out what need to be done
in
FLIP-111. I agree with you that we should narrow down the scope and focus
the
most important and basic part about docker image unification.

(1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the job
> cluster entry point

I want to add a small requirement for the entry point script. Currently,
for the native
K8s integration, we are using the apache/flink-docker image, but with
different entry
point("kubernetes-entry.sh"). Generate the java cmd in KubernetesUtils and
run it
in the entry point. I really hope it could merge to apache/flink-docker
"docker-entrypoint.sh".

(2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
> => support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box

If you mean to update the "flink-dist/conf/log4j-console.properties" to
support console and
local log files. I will say "+1". But we need to find a proper way to make
stdout/stderr output
both available for console and log files. Maybe till's proposal could help
to solve this.
"`program &2>1 | tee flink-user-taskexecutor.out`"

(3) Document typical usage scenarios in apache/flink-docker
> => this should replace the proposed flink_docker_utils helper

 I agree with you that in the first step, the documentation is enough for
typical usage(e.g. standalone
session, standalone perjob, native, plugins, python, etc.).


Best,
Yang


Ufuk Celebi  于2020年4月3日周五 上午1:03写道：

> Hey all,
>
> thanks for the proposal and the detailed discussion. In particular, thanks
> to Andrey for starting this thread and to Patrick for the additional ideas
> in the linked Google doc.
>
> I find many of the improvements proposed during the discussion (such as the
> unified entrypoint in Flink, proper configuration via environment
> variables, Dockerfiles for development, etc.) really important. At the same
> time, I believe that these improvements have quite a large scope and could
> be tackled independently as Till already suggested. I think we should
> ideally split the discussions for those improvements out of this thread and
> focus on the main target of FLIP-111.
>
> To me the major point of this FLIP is to consolidate existing Dockerfiles
> into apache/flink-docker and document typical usage scenarios (e.g. linking
> plugins, installing shaded Hadoop, running a job cluster, etc.).
>
> In order to achieve this, I think we could move forward as follows:
>
> (1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the job
> cluster entry point
> => this is currently missing and would block removal of the Dockerfile in
> flink-container
>
> (2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
> => support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box
>
> (3) Document typical usage scenarios in apache/flink-docker
> => this should replace the proposed flink_docker_utils helper
>
> (4) Remove the existing Dockerfiles from apache/flink
>
>
> I really like the convenience of a script such as flink_docker_utils, but I
> think we should avoid it for now, because most of the desired usage
> scenarios can be covered by documentation. After we have concluded (1)-(4)
> we can take a holistic look and identify what would benefit the most from
> such a script and how it would interact with the other planned
> improvements.
>
> I think this will give us a good basis to tackle the other major
> improvements that were proposed.
>
> – Ufuk
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:34 PM Patrick Lucas 
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Andrey for working on this, and everyone else for your feedback.
> >
> > This FLIP inspired me to discuss and write down some ideas I've had for a
> > while about configuring and running Flink (especially in Docker) that go
> > beyond the scope of this FLIP, but don't contradict what it sets out to
> do.
> >
> > The crux of it is that Flink should be maximally configurable using
> > environment variables, and not require manipulation of the filesystem
> (i.e.
> > moving/linking JARs or editing config files) in order to run in a large
> > majority of cases. And beyond that, particular for running Flink in
> Docker,
> > is that as much logic as possible should be a part of Flink itself and
> not,
> > for instance, in the docker-entrypoint.sh script. I've resisted adding
> > additional logic to the Flink Docker images except where necessary since
> > the beginning, and I believe we can get to the point where the only thing
> > the entrypoint script does is drop privileges before invoking a script
> > included in Flink.
> >
> > Ultimately, my ideal end-goal for running Flink in containers would
> fulfill
> > > the following points:
> > >
> > >- A user can configure all “start-time” aspects of Flink with
> > >environment variables, including additions to the classpath
> > >- Flink automatically adapts to the resources available to the
> > >container (such as what BashJavaUtils helps with today)
> > >- A user can include additional JARs using a 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Ufuk Celebi]

Hey all,

thanks for the proposal and the detailed discussion. In particular, thanks
to Andrey for starting this thread and to Patrick for the additional ideas
in the linked Google doc.

I find many of the improvements proposed during the discussion (such as the
unified entrypoint in Flink, proper configuration via environment
variables, Dockerfiles for development, etc.) really important. At the same
time, I believe that these improvements have quite a large scope and could
be tackled independently as Till already suggested. I think we should
ideally split the discussions for those improvements out of this thread and
focus on the main target of FLIP-111.

To me the major point of this FLIP is to consolidate existing Dockerfiles
into apache/flink-docker and document typical usage scenarios (e.g. linking
plugins, installing shaded Hadoop, running a job cluster, etc.).

In order to achieve this, I think we could move forward as follows:

(1) Extend the entrypoint script in apache/flink-docker to start the job
cluster entry point
=> this is currently missing and would block removal of the Dockerfile in
flink-container

(2) Extend the example log4j-console configuration
=> support log retrieval from the Flink UI out of the box

(3) Document typical usage scenarios in apache/flink-docker
=> this should replace the proposed flink_docker_utils helper

(4) Remove the existing Dockerfiles from apache/flink


I really like the convenience of a script such as flink_docker_utils, but I
think we should avoid it for now, because most of the desired usage
scenarios can be covered by documentation. After we have concluded (1)-(4)
we can take a holistic look and identify what would benefit the most from
such a script and how it would interact with the other planned improvements.

I think this will give us a good basis to tackle the other major
improvements that were proposed.

– Ufuk

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 4:34 PM Patrick Lucas  wrote:
>
> Thanks Andrey for working on this, and everyone else for your feedback.
>
> This FLIP inspired me to discuss and write down some ideas I've had for a
> while about configuring and running Flink (especially in Docker) that go
> beyond the scope of this FLIP, but don't contradict what it sets out to
do.
>
> The crux of it is that Flink should be maximally configurable using
> environment variables, and not require manipulation of the filesystem
(i.e.
> moving/linking JARs or editing config files) in order to run in a large
> majority of cases. And beyond that, particular for running Flink in
Docker,
> is that as much logic as possible should be a part of Flink itself and
not,
> for instance, in the docker-entrypoint.sh script. I've resisted adding
> additional logic to the Flink Docker images except where necessary since
> the beginning, and I believe we can get to the point where the only thing
> the entrypoint script does is drop privileges before invoking a script
> included in Flink.
>
> Ultimately, my ideal end-goal for running Flink in containers would
fulfill
> > the following points:
> >
> >- A user can configure all “start-time” aspects of Flink with
> >environment variables, including additions to the classpath
> >- Flink automatically adapts to the resources available to the
> >container (such as what BashJavaUtils helps with today)
> >- A user can include additional JARs using a mounted volume, or at
> >image build time with convenient tooling
> >- The role/mode (jobmanager, session) is specified as a command line
> >argument, with a single entrypoint program sufficing for all uses of
the
> >image
> >
> > As a bonus, if we could eliminate some or most of the layers of shell
> > scripts that are involved in starting a Flink server, perhaps by
> > re-implementing this part of the stack in Java, and exec-ing to actually
> > run Flink with the proper java CLI arguments, I think it would be a big
win
> > for the project.
>
>
> You can read the rest of my notes here:
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JCACSeDaqeZiXD9G1XxQBunwi-chwrdnFm38U1JxTDQ/edit
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:34 AM Andrey Zagrebin 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
> > probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
> > address its various concerns.
> >
> > We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic
in
> > Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending
official
> > Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a
set of
> > bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities
allow
> > to:
> >
> >- run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
> >task manager etc)
> >- customise the extending Dockerfile
> >- and its entry point
> >
> > Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing
Dockerfiles
> > and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
> > 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Patrick Lucas]

Thanks Andrey for working on this, and everyone else for your feedback.

This FLIP inspired me to discuss and write down some ideas I've had for a
while about configuring and running Flink (especially in Docker) that go
beyond the scope of this FLIP, but don't contradict what it sets out to do.

The crux of it is that Flink should be maximally configurable using
environment variables, and not require manipulation of the filesystem (i.e.
moving/linking JARs or editing config files) in order to run in a large
majority of cases. And beyond that, particular for running Flink in Docker,
is that as much logic as possible should be a part of Flink itself and not,
for instance, in the docker-entrypoint.sh script. I've resisted adding
additional logic to the Flink Docker images except where necessary since
the beginning, and I believe we can get to the point where the only thing
the entrypoint script does is drop privileges before invoking a script
included in Flink.

Ultimately, my ideal end-goal for running Flink in containers would fulfill
> the following points:
>
>- A user can configure all “start-time” aspects of Flink with
>environment variables, including additions to the classpath
>- Flink automatically adapts to the resources available to the
>container (such as what BashJavaUtils helps with today)
>- A user can include additional JARs using a mounted volume, or at
>image build time with convenient tooling
>- The role/mode (jobmanager, session) is specified as a command line
>argument, with a single entrypoint program sufficing for all uses of the
>image
>
> As a bonus, if we could eliminate some or most of the layers of shell
> scripts that are involved in starting a Flink server, perhaps by
> re-implementing this part of the stack in Java, and exec-ing to actually
> run Flink with the proper java CLI arguments, I think it would be a big win
> for the project.


You can read the rest of my notes here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JCACSeDaqeZiXD9G1XxQBunwi-chwrdnFm38U1JxTDQ/edit

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:34 AM Andrey Zagrebin 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
> probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
> address its various concerns.
>
> We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic in
> Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending official
> Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a set of
> bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities allow
> to:
>
>- run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
>task manager etc)
>- customise the extending Dockerfile
>- and its entry point
>
> Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing Dockerfiles
> and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
> apache/flink-docker and adjust existing docker use cases to refer to this
> new approach (mostly Kubernetes now).
>
> The first contributed version of Flink docker integration also contained
> example and docs for the integration with Bluemix in IBM cloud. We also
> suggest to maintain it outside of Flink repository (cc Markus Müller).
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Thanks for summarising the discussion points, Till.

# Configuration

## Env variables
Agree, this looks like an independent effort.

## dynamic program arguments
Indeed, jobmanager.sh needs small extension. It can be addressed
independently but I think it has chance to be addressed in this release
cycle.
taskmanager.sh/flink-console.sh/flink-daemon.sh look already fit for this
from what I see.
On the other hand, we already have FLINK_PROPERTIES and indeed we can keep
it until we have env vars.

## FLINK_PROPERTIES
I am not really saying to remove this right now. Indeed, it has been
already exposed and should stay for the backwards-compatibility at the
moment.
I was just wondering whether we could maintain/advertise less approaches in
future but which are good enough for users.
The benefit of env vars / dynamic args approaches is that they are supposed
to be already supported by Flink scripts out of the box
and would have almost no maintenance for us on the docker side.
On the other hand, I can also see that setting FLINK_PROPERTIES may be
easier in certain cases comparing to generation of env vars / dynamic args.

@Thomas Weise 
The current duplication may be fixed by setting the hardcoded ports
after FLINK_PROPERTIES if they are not set.
We can look at it during implementation in detail.

## flink_docker_utils configure "option.name" “value”
The previously discussed options are mostly for running the official image.
This scripted action is mostly for custom Dockerfiles or custom entry point
scripts extending the official image
where somebody wants to ship a preconfigured custom image.
This action would already deduplicate a lot of code for the ports which are
set to hardcoded values in the entry point script of the official
Dockerfile:

if grep -E "^blob\.server\.port:.*" "${CONF_FILE}"; then
sed -i -e "s/blob.server.port:*/blob.server.port: 6124/g" "${CONF_FILE}"
else
echo "blob.server.port: 6124" >> "${CONF_FILE}"
fi

If we are in doubt to document this for the users and expose as API, we do
not have to do it and expose later if needed.
I am ok to remove 'flink_docker_utils set_web_ui_port 8081' from FLIP.

# Logging

## Logging
The idea was to fix the existing console logging properties to log also
into files to fix Web UI [1].
Then we can just use Flink scripts with 'start-foreground' argument to log
into the stdout and files.

## Stdout/err

### Console
I think the stdout/stderr of Flink process might end up in the
container stdout/stderr if we run it in 'start-foreground' mode [2] (needs
checking).

### Local files
The proposal with the *tee* command looks promising. I would prefer to
write stdout/err into separate files and preserve them as stdout/err for
container logs.
This needs more experiments but may be possible with the *tee* command. I
suggest to check the details in PRs.

# Java/Python/Dev versiona
Shipping official images with various versions can be addressed
independently.

Best,
Andrey

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification#FLIP-111:Dockerimageunification-Logging
[2] https://docs.docker.com/config/containers/logging

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 2:14 PM Till Rohrmann  wrote:

> Thanks for creating this FLIP Andrey. I like the general idea pretty much.
>
> I tried to group some of the above-mentioned points in order to give my 50
> cent.
>
> # Configuration
>
> How to configure the Flink process seems to be the biggest question. Due
> to historical reasons we have a plethora of different ways on how to
> configure the Flink Docker image.
>
> I think the most general approach would be the configuration via
> environment variables where one can specify env variables with the form
> FLINK_= which will overwrite  with 
> in the effective configuration. However, this is something which deserves a
> separate effort and is out of scope for this proposal.
>
> The next best thing for configuring Flink (not the Flink process) would be
> dynamic program arguments. For this to work, we would need to extend the
> jobmanager.sh and taskmanager.sh scripts. I think this is strictly speaking
> also an orthogonal task and could happen as a follow up/independently.
>
> This leaves us with the envsubst and FLINK_PROPERTIES approaches. Even
> though I'm not a huge fan of these approaches, I think we should still
> support them for backwards compatibility reasons. Once we support
> configuration via env variables we should deprecate these methods and
> remove them in a subsequent release.
>
> Given this, I am bit unsure about introducing yet another way
> via flink_docker_utils configure "option.name" “value”. I think we should
> only offer this option if we are sure that we want to keep it in the future
> and that it won't be superceded by the env variables approach. Otherwise it
> will only add more maintenance burden.
>
> Long story short, with the existing configuration options (envsubts,
> FLINK_PROPERTIES) we can already configure the Flink 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Till Rohrmann]

Thanks for creating this FLIP Andrey. I like the general idea pretty much.

I tried to group some of the above-mentioned points in order to give my 50
cent.

# Configuration

How to configure the Flink process seems to be the biggest question. Due to
historical reasons we have a plethora of different ways on how to configure
the Flink Docker image.

I think the most general approach would be the configuration via
environment variables where one can specify env variables with the form
FLINK_= which will overwrite  with 
in the effective configuration. However, this is something which deserves a
separate effort and is out of scope for this proposal.

The next best thing for configuring Flink (not the Flink process) would be
dynamic program arguments. For this to work, we would need to extend the
jobmanager.sh and taskmanager.sh scripts. I think this is strictly speaking
also an orthogonal task and could happen as a follow up/independently.

This leaves us with the envsubst and FLINK_PROPERTIES approaches. Even
though I'm not a huge fan of these approaches, I think we should still
support them for backwards compatibility reasons. Once we support
configuration via env variables we should deprecate these methods and
remove them in a subsequent release.

Given this, I am bit unsure about introducing yet another way
via flink_docker_utils configure "option.name" “value”. I think we should
only offer this option if we are sure that we want to keep it in the future
and that it won't be superceded by the env variables approach. Otherwise it
will only add more maintenance burden.

Long story short, with the existing configuration options (envsubts,
FLINK_PROPERTIES) we can already configure the Flink process and Flink
itself. Since maintaining backwards compatibility is important, we could
rely on these mechanisms until we have proper env variable configuration
and don't have to introduce a new way to change the configuration.

# Logging & Stdout/err

## Logging

I think Konstantin is right and we should provide a log4j.properties file
which, per default, specifies the file and console appender. We could add a
special log4j.properties file to apache/flink-docker which we include in
the Dockerfile.

This approach will give users the most flexibility w/o relying on magic
(e.g. tailing the log files after starting the process in the background).

## Stdout/err

I think for printing the stdout/err output to STDOUT/ERR and to capture it
in a file there are solutions. For example, one could use `program &2>1 |
tee flink-user-taskexecutor.out` to achieve this.

# Java version

I agree that it would be nice to also offer a Java 11 Dockerfile. For the
sake of limiting the scope of this proposal I would suggest to do this as a
follow up issue.

# Dev version

Tooling to create a Docker image from the current Flink repository is
indeed very nice for development. As Andrey suggested, I think this would
be a good follow up for this proposal. I don't think that Andrey's current
proposal would block any future developments in this direction.

# Scripts

At the moment, I would be in favour of placing the Dockerfile scripts under
apache/flink-docker since they belong more to the Dockerfile than to
Flink's binary distribution. If we see that we might be able to reuse them
for the developer Dockerfile, then we can still move them to the Flink
repository.

I would refrain from offering special commands to set individual
configuration options (e.g., flink_docker_utils set_web_ui_port 8081). It
should be fine enough to do it via flink_docker-utils conifgure rest.port
8081 if we cannot solve it via the general configuration mechanism.

Cheers,
Till

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:38 AM Yangze Guo  wrote:

> I second Thomas that we can support both Java 8 and 11.
>
> Best,
> Yangze Guo
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:12 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
> >
> > -->
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:58 AM Andrey Zagrebin 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks for the further feedback Thomas and Yangze.
> >>
> >> > A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment
> variables
> >> is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment
> >> variable that can supply a configuration fragment
> >>
> >> True, we already have this. As I understand this was introduced for
> >> flexibility to template a custom flink-conf.yaml with env vars, put it
> into
> >> the FLINK_PROPERTIES and merge it with the default one.
> >> Could we achieve the same with the dynamic properties (-Drpc.port=1234),
> >> passed as image args to run it, instead of FLINK_PROPERTIES?
> >> They could be also parametrised with env vars. This would require
> >> jobmanager.sh to properly propagate them to
> >> the StandaloneSessionClusterEntrypoint though:
> >>
> https://github.com/docker-flink/docker-flink/pull/82#issuecomment-525285552
> >> cc @Till
> >> This would provide a unified configuration approach.
> >>
> >
> > How would that look like for the various use cases? The 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yangze Guo]

I second Thomas that we can support both Java 8 and 11.

Best,
Yangze Guo

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 12:12 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
>
> -->
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:58 AM Andrey Zagrebin  wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the further feedback Thomas and Yangze.
>>
>> > A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment variables
>> is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment
>> variable that can supply a configuration fragment
>>
>> True, we already have this. As I understand this was introduced for
>> flexibility to template a custom flink-conf.yaml with env vars, put it into
>> the FLINK_PROPERTIES and merge it with the default one.
>> Could we achieve the same with the dynamic properties (-Drpc.port=1234),
>> passed as image args to run it, instead of FLINK_PROPERTIES?
>> They could be also parametrised with env vars. This would require
>> jobmanager.sh to properly propagate them to
>> the StandaloneSessionClusterEntrypoint though:
>> https://github.com/docker-flink/docker-flink/pull/82#issuecomment-525285552
>> cc @Till
>> This would provide a unified configuration approach.
>>
>
> How would that look like for the various use cases? The k8s operator would 
> need to generate the -Dabc .. -Dxyz entry point command instead of setting 
> the FLINK_PROPERTIES environment variable? Potentially that introduces 
> additional complexity for little gain. Do most deployment platforms that 
> support Docker containers handle the command line route well? Backward 
> compatibility may also be a concern.
>
>>
>> > On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration
>> options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the
>> road
>>
>> I agree with it. The idea was to have just some shortcut scripted functions
>> to set options in flink-conf.yaml for a custom Dockerfile or entry point
>> script.
>> TASK_MANAGER_NUMBER_OF_TASK_SLOTS could be set as a dynamic property of
>> started JM.
>> I am not sure how many users depend on it. Maybe we could remove it.
>> It also looks we already have somewhat unclean state in
>> the docker-entrypoint.sh where some ports are set the hardcoded values
>> and then FLINK_PROPERTIES are applied potentially duplicating options in
>> the result flink-conf.yaml.
>
>
> That is indeed possible and duplicate entries from FLINK_PROPERTIES prevail. 
> Unfortunately, the special cases you mention were already established and the 
> generic mechanism was added later for the k8s operators.
>
>>
>>
>> I can see some potential usage of env vars as standard entry point args but
>> for purposes related to something which cannot be achieved by passing entry
>> point args, like changing flink-conf.yaml options. Nothing comes into my
>> mind at the moment. It could be some setting specific to the running mode
>> of the entry point. The mode itself can stay the first arg of the entry
>> point.
>>
>> > I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11
>>
>> > Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
>> > - Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we could just change
>> > the base image from openjdk:8-jre to openjdk:11-jre in template docker
>> > file[1]. Correct me if I understand incorrectly. Also, I agree to move
>> > this out of the scope of this FLIP if it indeed takes much extra
>> > effort.
>>
>> This is what I meant by bumping up the Java version in the docker hub Flink
>> image:
>> FROM openjdk:8-jre -> FROM openjdk:11-jre
>> This can be polled dependently in user mailing list.
>
>
> That sounds reasonable as long as we can still support both Java versions 
> (i.e. provide separate images for 8 and 11).
>
>>
>>
>> > and in general use a base image that allows the (straightforward) use of
>> more recent versions of other software (Python etc.)
>>
>> This can be polled whether to always include some version of python into
>> the docker hub image.
>> A potential problem here is once it is there, it is some hassle to
>> remove/change it in a custom extended Dockerfile.
>>
>> It would be also nice to avoid maintaining images for various combinations
>> of installed Java/Scala/Python in docker hub.
>>
>> > Regarding building from local dist:
>> > - Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
>> > popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
>> > work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
>> > docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
>> > provide a script for devs.
>> > - I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
>> > users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
>> > would not take much extra effort.
>> > - The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.
>>
>> I would see any scripts introduced in this FLIP also as potential building
>> blocks for a custom dev Dockerfile.
>> Maybe, this will be all what we need for dev images or we write a dev
>> Dockerfile, highly 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Thomas Weise]

-->

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 1:58 AM Andrey Zagrebin 
wrote:

> Thanks for the further feedback Thomas and Yangze.
>
> > A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment variables
> is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment
> variable that can supply a configuration fragment
>
> True, we already have this. As I understand this was introduced for
> flexibility to template a custom flink-conf.yaml with env vars, put it into
> the FLINK_PROPERTIES and merge it with the default one.
> Could we achieve the same with the dynamic properties (-Drpc.port=1234),
> passed as image args to run it, instead of FLINK_PROPERTIES?
> They could be also parametrised with env vars. This would require
> jobmanager.sh to properly propagate them to
> the StandaloneSessionClusterEntrypoint though:
> https://github.com/docker-flink/docker-flink/pull/82#issuecomment-525285552
> cc @Till
> This would provide a unified configuration approach.
>
>
How would that look like for the various use cases? The k8s operator would
need to generate the -Dabc .. -Dxyz entry point command instead of setting
the FLINK_PROPERTIES environment variable? Potentially that introduces
additional complexity for little gain. Do most deployment platforms that
support Docker containers handle the command line route well? Backward
compatibility may also be a concern.


> > On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration
> options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the
> road
>
> I agree with it. The idea was to have just some shortcut scripted functions
> to set options in flink-conf.yaml for a custom Dockerfile or entry point
> script.
> TASK_MANAGER_NUMBER_OF_TASK_SLOTS could be set as a dynamic property of
> started JM.
> I am not sure how many users depend on it. Maybe we could remove it.
> It also looks we already have somewhat unclean state in
> the docker-entrypoint.sh where some ports are set the hardcoded values
> and then FLINK_PROPERTIES are applied potentially duplicating options in
> the result flink-conf.yaml.
>

That is indeed possible and duplicate entries from FLINK_PROPERTIES
prevail. Unfortunately, the special cases you mention were already
established and the generic mechanism was added later for the k8s operators.


>
> I can see some potential usage of env vars as standard entry point args but
> for purposes related to something which cannot be achieved by passing entry
> point args, like changing flink-conf.yaml options. Nothing comes into my
> mind at the moment. It could be some setting specific to the running mode
> of the entry point. The mode itself can stay the first arg of the entry
> point.
>
> > I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11
>
> > Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
> > - Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we could just change
> > the base image from openjdk:8-jre to openjdk:11-jre in template docker
> > file[1]. Correct me if I understand incorrectly. Also, I agree to move
> > this out of the scope of this FLIP if it indeed takes much extra
> > effort.
>
> This is what I meant by bumping up the Java version in the docker hub Flink
> image:
> FROM openjdk:8-jre -> FROM openjdk:11-jre
> This can be polled dependently in user mailing list.
>

That sounds reasonable as long as we can still support both Java versions
(i.e. provide separate images for 8 and 11).


>
> > and in general use a base image that allows the (straightforward) use of
> more recent versions of other software (Python etc.)
>
> This can be polled whether to always include some version of python into
> the docker hub image.
> A potential problem here is once it is there, it is some hassle to
> remove/change it in a custom extended Dockerfile.
>
> It would be also nice to avoid maintaining images for various combinations
> of installed Java/Scala/Python in docker hub.
>
> > Regarding building from local dist:
> > - Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
> > popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
> > work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
> > docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
> > provide a script for devs.
> > - I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
> > users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
> > would not take much extra effort.
> > - The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.
>
> I would see any scripts introduced in this FLIP also as potential building
> blocks for a custom dev Dockerfile.
> Maybe, this will be all what we need for dev images or we write a dev
> Dockerfile, highly parametrised for building a dev image.
> If scripts stay in apache/flink-docker, it is also somewhat inconvenient to
> use them in the main Flink repo but possible.
> If we move them to apache/flink then we will have to e.g. include them into
> the release to make them 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yang Wang]

Hi Andrey,

Thanks for your explanation.

> About the logging
What i mean is we could not forward the stdout/stderr to local files and
docker stdout
at the same time by using log4j. For the jobmanager.log/taskmanager.log, it
works
quite well since we only need to add a console appender in
the log4j.properties.

I am just curious how to forward the stdout/stderr to local files and
docker stdout
at the same time by using log4j :)


Best,
Yang

Andrey Zagrebin  于2020年3月16日周一 下午4:58写道：

> Thanks for the further feedback Thomas and Yangze.
>
> > A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment
> variables is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an
> environment variable that can supply a configuration fragment
>
> True, we already have this. As I understand this was introduced for
> flexibility to template a custom flink-conf.yaml with env vars, put it into
> the FLINK_PROPERTIES and merge it with the default one.
> Could we achieve the same with the dynamic properties (-Drpc.port=1234),
> passed as image args to run it, instead of FLINK_PROPERTIES?
> They could be also parametrised with env vars. This would require
> jobmanager.sh to properly propagate them to
> the StandaloneSessionClusterEntrypoint though:
> https://github.com/docker-flink/docker-flink/pull/82#issuecomment-525285552
> cc @Till
> This would provide a unified configuration approach.
>
> > On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration
> options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the
> road
>
> I agree with it. The idea was to have just some shortcut scripted
> functions to set options in flink-conf.yaml for a custom Dockerfile or
> entry point script.
> TASK_MANAGER_NUMBER_OF_TASK_SLOTS could be set as a dynamic property of
> started JM.
> I am not sure how many users depend on it. Maybe we could remove it.
> It also looks we already have somewhat unclean state in
> the docker-entrypoint.sh where some ports are set the hardcoded values
> and then FLINK_PROPERTIES are applied potentially duplicating options in
> the result flink-conf.yaml.
>
> I can see some potential usage of env vars as standard entry point args
> but for purposes related to something which cannot be achieved by passing
> entry point args, like changing flink-conf.yaml options. Nothing comes into
> my mind at the moment. It could be some setting specific to the running
> mode of the entry point. The mode itself can stay the first arg of the
> entry point.
>
> > I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11
>
> > Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
> > - Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we could just change
> > the base image from openjdk:8-jre to openjdk:11-jre in template docker
> > file[1]. Correct me if I understand incorrectly. Also, I agree to move
> > this out of the scope of this FLIP if it indeed takes much extra
> > effort.
>
> This is what I meant by bumping up the Java version in the docker hub
> Flink image:
> FROM openjdk:8-jre -> FROM openjdk:11-jre
> This can be polled dependently in user mailing list.
>
> > and in general use a base image that allows the (straightforward) use of
> more recent versions of other software (Python etc.)
>
> This can be polled whether to always include some version of python into
> the docker hub image.
> A potential problem here is once it is there, it is some hassle to
> remove/change it in a custom extended Dockerfile.
>
> It would be also nice to avoid maintaining images for various combinations
> of installed Java/Scala/Python in docker hub.
>
> > Regarding building from local dist:
> > - Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
> > popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
> > work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
> > docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
> > provide a script for devs.
> > - I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
> > users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
> > would not take much extra effort.
> > - The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.
>
> I would see any scripts introduced in this FLIP also as potential building
> blocks for a custom dev Dockerfile.
> Maybe, this will be all what we need for dev images or we write a dev
> Dockerfile, highly parametrised for building a dev image.
> If scripts stay in apache/flink-docker, it is also somewhat inconvenient
> to use them in the main Flink repo but possible.
> If we move them to apache/flink then we will have to e.g. include them
> into the release to make them easily available in apache/flink-docker and
> maintain them in main repo, although they are only docker specific.
> All in all, I would say, once we implement them, we can revisit this topic.
>
> Best,
> Andrey
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:58 AM Yangze Guo  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the reply, Andrey.
>>
>> Regarding 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Thanks for the further feedback Thomas and Yangze.

> A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment variables
is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment
variable that can supply a configuration fragment

True, we already have this. As I understand this was introduced for
flexibility to template a custom flink-conf.yaml with env vars, put it into
the FLINK_PROPERTIES and merge it with the default one.
Could we achieve the same with the dynamic properties (-Drpc.port=1234),
passed as image args to run it, instead of FLINK_PROPERTIES?
They could be also parametrised with env vars. This would require
jobmanager.sh to properly propagate them to
the StandaloneSessionClusterEntrypoint though:
https://github.com/docker-flink/docker-flink/pull/82#issuecomment-525285552
cc @Till
This would provide a unified configuration approach.

> On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration
options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the
road

I agree with it. The idea was to have just some shortcut scripted functions
to set options in flink-conf.yaml for a custom Dockerfile or entry point
script.
TASK_MANAGER_NUMBER_OF_TASK_SLOTS could be set as a dynamic property of
started JM.
I am not sure how many users depend on it. Maybe we could remove it.
It also looks we already have somewhat unclean state in
the docker-entrypoint.sh where some ports are set the hardcoded values
and then FLINK_PROPERTIES are applied potentially duplicating options in
the result flink-conf.yaml.

I can see some potential usage of env vars as standard entry point args but
for purposes related to something which cannot be achieved by passing entry
point args, like changing flink-conf.yaml options. Nothing comes into my
mind at the moment. It could be some setting specific to the running mode
of the entry point. The mode itself can stay the first arg of the entry
point.

> I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11

> Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
> - Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we could just change
> the base image from openjdk:8-jre to openjdk:11-jre in template docker
> file[1]. Correct me if I understand incorrectly. Also, I agree to move
> this out of the scope of this FLIP if it indeed takes much extra
> effort.

This is what I meant by bumping up the Java version in the docker hub Flink
image:
FROM openjdk:8-jre -> FROM openjdk:11-jre
This can be polled dependently in user mailing list.

> and in general use a base image that allows the (straightforward) use of
more recent versions of other software (Python etc.)

This can be polled whether to always include some version of python into
the docker hub image.
A potential problem here is once it is there, it is some hassle to
remove/change it in a custom extended Dockerfile.

It would be also nice to avoid maintaining images for various combinations
of installed Java/Scala/Python in docker hub.

> Regarding building from local dist:
> - Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
> popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
> work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
> docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
> provide a script for devs.
> - I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
> users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
> would not take much extra effort.
> - The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.

I would see any scripts introduced in this FLIP also as potential building
blocks for a custom dev Dockerfile.
Maybe, this will be all what we need for dev images or we write a dev
Dockerfile, highly parametrised for building a dev image.
If scripts stay in apache/flink-docker, it is also somewhat inconvenient to
use them in the main Flink repo but possible.
If we move them to apache/flink then we will have to e.g. include them into
the release to make them easily available in apache/flink-docker and
maintain them in main repo, although they are only docker specific.
All in all, I would say, once we implement them, we can revisit this topic.

Best,
Andrey

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 8:58 AM Yangze Guo  wrote:

> Thanks for the reply, Andrey.
>
> Regarding building from local dist:
> - Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
> popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
> work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
> docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
> provide a script for devs.
> - I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
> users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
> would not take much extra effort.
> - The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.
>
> Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
> - Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yangze Guo]

Thanks for the reply, Andrey.

Regarding building from local dist:
- Yes, I bring this up mostly for development purpose. Since k8s is
popular, I believe more and more developers would like to test their
work on k8s cluster. I'm not sure should all developers write a custom
docker file themselves in this scenario. Thus, I still prefer to
provide a script for devs.
- I agree to keep the scope of this FLIP mostly for those normal
users. But as far as I can see, supporting building from local dist
would not take much extra effort.
- The maven docker plugin sounds good. I'll take a look at it.

Regarding supporting JAVA 11:
- Not sure if it is necessary to ship JAVA. Maybe we could just change
the base image from openjdk:8-jre to openjdk:11-jre in template docker
file[1]. Correct me if I understand incorrectly. Also, I agree to move
this out of the scope of this FLIP if it indeed takes much extra
effort.

Regarding the custom configuration, the mechanism that Thomas mentioned LGTM.

[1] 
https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/master/Dockerfile-debian.template

Best,
Yangze Guo

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 5:52 AM Thomas Weise  wrote:
>
> Thanks for working on improvements to the Flink Docker container images. This 
> will be important as more and more users are looking to adopt Kubernetes and 
> other deployment tooling that relies on Docker images.
>
> A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment variables is 
> essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment 
> variable that can supply a configuration fragment:
>
> https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L88
> https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L85
>
> This gives the necessary control for infrastructure use cases that aim to 
> supply deployment tooling other users. An example in this category this is 
> the FlinkK8sOperator:
>
> https://github.com/lyft/flinkk8soperator/tree/master/examples/wordcount
>
> On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration 
> options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the 
> road:
>
> https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L97
>
> Besides the configuration, it may be worthwhile to see in which other ways 
> the base Docker images can provide more flexibility to incentivize wider 
> adoption.
>
> I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11 and in general use a 
> base image that allows the (straightforward) use of more recent versions of 
> other software (Python etc.)
>
> https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/d3416e720377e9b4c07a2d0f4591965264ac74c5/Dockerfile-debian.template#L19
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:26 PM Andrey Zagrebin  wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for the feedback!
>>
>> *@Yangze Guo*
>>
>> - Regarding the flink_docker_utils#install_flink function, I think it
>> > should also support build from local dist and build from a
>> > user-defined archive.
>>
>> I suppose you bring this up mostly for development purpose or powerful
>> users.
>> Most of normal users are usually interested in mainstream released versions
>> of Flink.
>> Although, you are bring a valid concern, my idea was to keep scope of this
>> FLIP mostly for those normal users.
>> The powerful users are usually capable to design a completely
>> custom Dockerfile themselves.
>> At the moment, we already have custom Dockerfiles e.g. for tests in
>> flink-end-to-end-tests/test-scripts/docker-hadoop-secure-cluster/Dockerfile.
>> We can add something similar for development purposes and maybe introduce a
>> special maven goal. There is a maven docker plugin, afaik.
>> I will add this to FLIP as next step.
>>
>> - It seems that the install_shaded_hadoop could be an option of
>> > install_flink
>>
>> I woud rather think about this as a separate independent optional step.
>>
>> - Should we support JAVA 11? Currently, most of the docker file based on
>> > JAVA 8.
>>
>> Indeed, it is a valid concern. Java version is a fundamental property of
>> the docker image.
>> To customise this in the current mainstream image is difficult, this would
>> require to ship it w/o Java at all.
>> Or this is a separate discussion whether we want to distribute docker hub
>> images with different Java versions or just bump it to Java 11.
>> This should be easy in a custom Dockerfile for development purposes though
>> as mentioned before.
>>
>> - I do not understand how to set config options through
>>
>> "flink_docker_utils configure"? Does this step happen during the image
>> > build or the container start? If it happens during the image build,
>> > there would be a new image every time we change the config. If it just
>> > a part of the container entrypoint, I think there is no need to add a
>> > configure command, we could just add all 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Thomas Weise]

Thanks for working on improvements to the Flink Docker container images.
This will be important as more and more users are looking to adopt
Kubernetes and other deployment tooling that relies on Docker images.

A generic, dynamic configuration mechanism based on environment variables
is essential and it is already supported via envsubst and an environment
variable that can supply a configuration fragment:

https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L88
https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L85

This gives the necessary control for infrastructure use cases that aim to
supply deployment tooling other users. An example in this category this is
the FlinkK8sOperator:

https://github.com/lyft/flinkk8soperator/tree/master/examples/wordcount

On the flip side, attempting to support a fixed subset of configuration
options is brittle and will probably lead to compatibility issues down the
road:

https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/09adf2dcd99abfb6180e1e2b5b917b288e0c01f6/docker-entrypoint.sh#L97

Besides the configuration, it may be worthwhile to see in which other ways
the base Docker images can provide more flexibility to incentivize wider
adoption.

I would second that it is desirable to support Java 11 and in general use a
base image that allows the (straightforward) use of more recent versions of
other software (Python etc.)

https://github.com/apache/flink-docker/blob/d3416e720377e9b4c07a2d0f4591965264ac74c5/Dockerfile-debian.template#L19

Thanks,
Thomas

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:26 PM Andrey Zagrebin 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Thanks a lot for the feedback!
>
> *@Yangze Guo*
>
> - Regarding the flink_docker_utils#install_flink function, I think it
> > should also support build from local dist and build from a
> > user-defined archive.
>
> I suppose you bring this up mostly for development purpose or powerful
> users.
> Most of normal users are usually interested in mainstream released versions
> of Flink.
> Although, you are bring a valid concern, my idea was to keep scope of this
> FLIP mostly for those normal users.
> The powerful users are usually capable to design a completely
> custom Dockerfile themselves.
> At the moment, we already have custom Dockerfiles e.g. for tests in
>
> flink-end-to-end-tests/test-scripts/docker-hadoop-secure-cluster/Dockerfile.
> We can add something similar for development purposes and maybe introduce a
> special maven goal. There is a maven docker plugin, afaik.
> I will add this to FLIP as next step.
>
> - It seems that the install_shaded_hadoop could be an option of
> > install_flink
>
> I woud rather think about this as a separate independent optional step.
>
> - Should we support JAVA 11? Currently, most of the docker file based on
> > JAVA 8.
>
> Indeed, it is a valid concern. Java version is a fundamental property of
> the docker image.
> To customise this in the current mainstream image is difficult, this would
> require to ship it w/o Java at all.
> Or this is a separate discussion whether we want to distribute docker hub
> images with different Java versions or just bump it to Java 11.
> This should be easy in a custom Dockerfile for development purposes though
> as mentioned before.
>
> - I do not understand how to set config options through
>
> "flink_docker_utils configure"? Does this step happen during the image
> > build or the container start? If it happens during the image build,
> > there would be a new image every time we change the config. If it just
> > a part of the container entrypoint, I think there is no need to add a
> > configure command, we could just add all dynamic config options to the
> > args list of "start_jobmaster"/"start_session_jobmanager". Am I
> > understanding this correctly?
>
>  `flink_docker_utils configure ...` can be called everywhere:
> - while building a custom image (`RUN flink_docker_utils configure ..`) by
> extending our base image from docker hub (`from flink`)
> - in a custom entry point as well
> I will check this but if user can also pass a dynamic config option it also
> sounds like a good option
> Our standard entry point script in base image could just properly forward
> the arguments to the Flink process.
>
> @Yang Wang
>
> > About docker utils
> > I really like the idea to provide some utils for the docker file and
> entry
> > point. The
> > `flink_docker_utils` will help to build the image easier. I am not sure
> > about the
> > `flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster`. Do you mean when we build a docker
> > image, we
> > need to add `RUN flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster` in the docker file?
> > Why do we need this?
>
> This is a scripted action to start JM. It can be called everywhere.
> Indeed, it does not make too much sense to run it in Dockerfile.
> Mostly, the idea was to use in a custom entry point. When our base docker
> hub image is started its entry point can be also 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Hi All,

Thanks a lot for the feedback!

*@Yangze Guo*

- Regarding the flink_docker_utils#install_flink function, I think it
> should also support build from local dist and build from a
> user-defined archive.

I suppose you bring this up mostly for development purpose or powerful
users.
Most of normal users are usually interested in mainstream released versions
of Flink.
Although, you are bring a valid concern, my idea was to keep scope of this
FLIP mostly for those normal users.
The powerful users are usually capable to design a completely
custom Dockerfile themselves.
At the moment, we already have custom Dockerfiles e.g. for tests in
flink-end-to-end-tests/test-scripts/docker-hadoop-secure-cluster/Dockerfile.
We can add something similar for development purposes and maybe introduce a
special maven goal. There is a maven docker plugin, afaik.
I will add this to FLIP as next step.

- It seems that the install_shaded_hadoop could be an option of
> install_flink

I woud rather think about this as a separate independent optional step.

- Should we support JAVA 11? Currently, most of the docker file based on
> JAVA 8.

Indeed, it is a valid concern. Java version is a fundamental property of
the docker image.
To customise this in the current mainstream image is difficult, this would
require to ship it w/o Java at all.
Or this is a separate discussion whether we want to distribute docker hub
images with different Java versions or just bump it to Java 11.
This should be easy in a custom Dockerfile for development purposes though
as mentioned before.

- I do not understand how to set config options through

"flink_docker_utils configure"? Does this step happen during the image
> build or the container start? If it happens during the image build,
> there would be a new image every time we change the config. If it just
> a part of the container entrypoint, I think there is no need to add a
> configure command, we could just add all dynamic config options to the
> args list of "start_jobmaster"/"start_session_jobmanager". Am I
> understanding this correctly?

 `flink_docker_utils configure ...` can be called everywhere:
- while building a custom image (`RUN flink_docker_utils configure ..`) by
extending our base image from docker hub (`from flink`)
- in a custom entry point as well
I will check this but if user can also pass a dynamic config option it also
sounds like a good option
Our standard entry point script in base image could just properly forward
the arguments to the Flink process.

@Yang Wang

> About docker utils
> I really like the idea to provide some utils for the docker file and entry
> point. The
> `flink_docker_utils` will help to build the image easier. I am not sure
> about the
> `flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster`. Do you mean when we build a docker
> image, we
> need to add `RUN flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster` in the docker file?
> Why do we need this?

This is a scripted action to start JM. It can be called everywhere.
Indeed, it does not make too much sense to run it in Dockerfile.
Mostly, the idea was to use in a custom entry point. When our base docker
hub image is started its entry point can be also completely overridden.
The actions are also sorted in the FLIP: for Dockerfile or for entry point.
E.g. our standard entry point script in the base docker hub image can
already use it.
Anyways, it was just an example, the details are to be defined in Jira, imo.

> About docker entry point
> I agree with you that the docker entry point could more powerful with more
> functionality.
> Mostly, it is about to override the config options. If we support dynamic
> properties, i think
> it is more convenient for users without any learning curve.
> `docker run flink session_jobmanager -D rest.bind-port=8081`

Indeed, as mentioned before, it can be a better option.
The standard entry point also decides at least what to run JM or TM. I
think we will see what else makes sense to include there during the
implementation.
Some specifics may be more convenient to set with env vars as Konstantin
mentioned.

> About the logging
> Updating the `log4j-console.properties` to support multiple appender is a
> better option.
> Currently, the native K8s is suggesting users to debug the logs in this
> way[1]. However,
> there is also some problems. The stderr and stdout of JM/TM processes could
> not be
> forwarded to the docker container console.

Strange, we should check maybe there is a docker option to query the
container's stderr output as well.
If we forward Flink process stdout as usual in bash console, it should not
be a problem. Why can it not be forwarded?

@Konstantin Knauf

For the entrypoint, have you considered to also allow setting configuration
> via environment variables as in "docker run -e FLINK_REST_BIN_PORT=8081
> ..."? This is quite common and more flexible, e.g. it makes it very easy to
> pass values of Kubernetes Secrets into the Flink configuration.

This is indeed an interesting option to 

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Konstantin Knauf]

Hi Andrey,

thanks a lot for this proposal. The variety of Docker files in the project
has been causing quite some confusion.

For the entrypoint, have you considered to also allow setting configuration
via environment variables as in "docker run -e FLINK_REST_BIN_PORT=8081
..."? This is quite common and more flexible, e.g. it makes it very easy to
pass values of Kubernetes Secrets into the Flink configuration.

With respect to logging, I would opt to keep this very basic and to only
support logging to the console (maybe with a fix for the web user
interface). For everything else, users can easily build their own images
based on library/flink (provide the dependencies, change the logging
configuration).

Cheers,

Konstantin


On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:01 AM Yang Wang  wrote:

> Hi Andrey,
>
>
> Thanks for driving this significant FLIP. From the user ML, we could also
> know there are
> many users running Flink in container environment. Then the docker image
> will be the
> very basic requirement. Just as you say, we should provide a unified place
> for all various
> usage(e.g. session, job, native k8s, swarm, etc.).
>
>
> > About docker utils
>
> I really like the idea to provide some utils for the docker file and entry
> point. The
> `flink_docker_utils` will help to build the image easier. I am not sure
> about the
> `flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster`. Do you mean when we build a docker
> image, we
> need to add `RUN flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster` in the docker file?
> Why do we need this?
>
>
> > About docker entry point
>
> I agree with you that the docker entry point could more powerful with more
> functionality.
> Mostly, it is about to override the config options. If we support dynamic
> properties, i think
> it is more convenient for users without any learning curve.
> `docker run flink session_jobmanager -D rest.bind-port=8081`
>
>
> > About the logging
>
> Updating the `log4j-console.properties` to support multiple appender is a
> better option.
> Currently, the native K8s is suggesting users to debug the logs in this
> way[1]. However,
> there is also some problems. The stderr and stdout of JM/TM processes
> could not be
> forwarded to the docker container console.
>
>
> [1].
> https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-master/ops/deployment/native_kubernetes.html#log-files
>
>
> Best,
> Yang
>
>
>
>
> Andrey Zagrebin  于2020年3月4日周三 下午5:34写道：
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
>> probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
>> address its various concerns.
>>
>> We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic in
>> Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending official
>> Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a set
>> of
>> bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities allow
>> to:
>>
>>- run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
>>task manager etc)
>>- customise the extending Dockerfile
>>- and its entry point
>>
>> Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing Dockerfiles
>> and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
>> apache/flink-docker and adjust existing docker use cases to refer to this
>> new approach (mostly Kubernetes now).
>>
>> The first contributed version of Flink docker integration also contained
>> example and docs for the integration with Bluemix in IBM cloud. We also
>> suggest to maintain it outside of Flink repository (cc Markus Müller).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Andrey
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification
>>
>

-- 

Konstantin Knauf | Head of Product

+49 160 91394525


Follow us @VervericaData Ververica 


--

Join Flink Forward  - The Apache Flink
Conference

Stream Processing | Event Driven | Real Time

--

Ververica GmbH | Invalidenstrasse 115, 10115 Berlin, Germany

--
Ververica GmbH
Registered at Amtsgericht Charlottenburg: HRB 158244 B
Managing Directors: Timothy Alexander Steinert, Yip Park Tung Jason, Ji
(Tony) Cheng

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yang Wang]

 Hi Andrey,


Thanks for driving this significant FLIP. From the user ML, we could also
know there are
many users running Flink in container environment. Then the docker image
will be the
very basic requirement. Just as you say, we should provide a unified place
for all various
usage(e.g. session, job, native k8s, swarm, etc.).


> About docker utils

I really like the idea to provide some utils for the docker file and entry
point. The
`flink_docker_utils` will help to build the image easier. I am not sure
about the
`flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster`. Do you mean when we build a docker
image, we
need to add `RUN flink_docker_utils start_jobmaster` in the docker file?
Why do we need this?


> About docker entry point

I agree with you that the docker entry point could more powerful with more
functionality.
Mostly, it is about to override the config options. If we support dynamic
properties, i think
it is more convenient for users without any learning curve.
`docker run flink session_jobmanager -D rest.bind-port=8081`


> About the logging

Updating the `log4j-console.properties` to support multiple appender is a
better option.
Currently, the native K8s is suggesting users to debug the logs in this
way[1]. However,
there is also some problems. The stderr and stdout of JM/TM processes could
not be
forwarded to the docker container console.


[1].
https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-master/ops/deployment/native_kubernetes.html#log-files


Best,
Yang




Andrey Zagrebin  于2020年3月4日周三 下午5:34写道：

> Hi All,
>
> If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
> probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
> address its various concerns.
>
> We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic in
> Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending official
> Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a set of
> bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities allow
> to:
>
>- run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
>task manager etc)
>- customise the extending Dockerfile
>- and its entry point
>
> Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing Dockerfiles
> and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
> apache/flink-docker and adjust existing docker use cases to refer to this
> new approach (mostly Kubernetes now).
>
> The first contributed version of Flink docker integration also contained
> example and docs for the integration with Bluemix in IBM cloud. We also
> suggest to maintain it outside of Flink repository (cc Markus Müller).
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey
>
> [1]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification
>

Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Yangze Guo]

Thanks for open this FLIP and summarize the current state of
Dockerfiles, Andrey! +1 for this idea.

I have some minor comments / questions:
- Regarding the flink_docker_utils#install_flink function, I think it
should also support build from local dist and build from a
user-defined archive.
- It seems that the install_shaded_hadoop could be an option of install_flink.
- Should we support JAVA 11? Currently, most of the docker file based on JAVA 8.
- I do not understand how to set config options through
"flink_docker_utils configure"? Does this step happen during the image
build or the container start? If it happens during the image build,
there would be a new image every time we change the config. If it just
a part of the container entrypoint, I think there is no need to add a
configure command, we could just add all dynamic config options to the
args list of "start_jobmaster"/"start_session_jobmanager". Am I
understanding this correctly?


Best,
Yangze Guo

Best,
Yangze Guo


On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 5:34 PM Andrey Zagrebin  wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
> probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
> address its various concerns.
>
> We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic in
> Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending official
> Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a set of
> bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities allow
> to:
>
>- run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
>task manager etc)
>- customise the extending Dockerfile
>- and its entry point
>
> Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing Dockerfiles
> and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
> apache/flink-docker and adjust existing docker use cases to refer to this
> new approach (mostly Kubernetes now).
>
> The first contributed version of Flink docker integration also contained
> example and docs for the integration with Bluemix in IBM cloud. We also
> suggest to maintain it outside of Flink repository (cc Markus Müller).
>
> Thanks,
> Andrey
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification

[DISCUSS] FLIP-111: Docker image unification

[Andrey Zagrebin]

Hi All,

If you have ever touched the docker topic in Flink, you
probably noticed that we have multiple places in docs and repos which
address its various concerns.

We have prepared a FLIP [1] to simplify the perception of docker topic in
Flink by users. It mostly advocates for an approach of extending official
Flink image from the docker hub. For convenience, it can come with a set of
bash utilities and documented examples of their usage. The utilities allow
to:

   - run the docker image in various modes (single job, session master,
   task manager etc)
   - customise the extending Dockerfile
   - and its entry point

Eventually, the FLIP suggests to remove all other user facing Dockerfiles
and building scripts from Flink repo, move all docker docs to
apache/flink-docker and adjust existing docker use cases to refer to this
new approach (mostly Kubernetes now).

The first contributed version of Flink docker integration also contained
example and docs for the integration with Bluemix in IBM cloud. We also
suggest to maintain it outside of Flink repository (cc Markus Müller).

Thanks,
Andrey

[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-111%3A+Docker+image+unification