[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2667?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Till Rohrmann closed FLINK-2667. -------------------------------- Resolution: Won't Do Closed for inactivity. > Rework configuration parameters > ------------------------------- > > Key: FLINK-2667 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2667 > Project: Flink > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Deployment / Scripts > Affects Versions: 0.10.0 > Reporter: Maximilian Michels > Assignee: Maximilian Michels > Priority: Major > > In the course of FLINK-2641, we came up with some changes to make the > configuration parameters more meaningful and self-explanatory. Some concerns > about backwards-compatibility were raised in the associated pull request: > https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1125. That's why I decided to delay > those changes. > Here are the changes to the configuration which I would like to propose: > {{taskmanager.memory.size}} --> {{taskmanager.memory.managed}} > {{taskmanager.memory.fraction}} --> {{taskmanager.memory.managed.fraction}} > {{taskmanager.heap.mb}} --> {{taskmanager.memory}} > (Change its meaning to combined JVM heap + off-heap memory) > {{jobmanager.heap.mb}} --> {{jobmanager.memory}} > {{taskmanager.network.numberOfBuffers}} --> {{taskmanager.network.memory}} > (Specify the network size in terms of space and not in terms of the number of > buffers) > I think those changes would make configuration easier and improve the overall > user experience of Flink. The drawback is that it requires some users to > update their config files. I believe the negative impact will be very little > because only two of the changed parameters are present in the default config. > Adapting to these new parameters should be easy because they make a lot more > sense but I wanted to put this up for debate. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)