Thanks for the discussion. That answered many questions I have.

Also, in the same line, can someone detail the difference between State Backend 
& External checkpoint?

Also, programmatic API, thru which methods we can configure those.



Regards,
Raja.

From: Stefan Richter <s.rich...@data-artisans.com>
Date: Thursday, August 10, 2017 at 11:38 AM
To: Henri Heiskanen <henri.heiska...@gmail.com>
Cc: "user@flink.apache.org" <user@flink.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: difference between checkpoints & savepoints

I most of the things you are asking for are already there: you can configure 
checkpoint interval + externalized cp, the backend, and the location for 
savepoints and externalized checkpoints. You can restart from savepoints and 
externalized checkpoints from the CLI. One point I am not entirely sure about 
are automatic CP or SP when a job is shut down. IIRC, this is either already 
available, or in the making.

Resolving the last external checkpoint is as easy as listing the configured 
directory, especially if you only retain the last one. Otherwise the timestamp 
gives the required information. It is true that there could also be an CLI 
option to automatically does the work to pick the latest.

And there is a command line parameter switch to supply savepoints and 
externalized checkpoints for restarts. I think that makes more sense than a 
general configuration of automatic restart behaviour because the user might 
also intend to start a new, clean run for the job.


Am 10.08.2017 um 15:45 schrieb Henri Heiskanen 
<henri.heiska...@gmail.com<mailto:henri.heiska...@gmail.com>>:

Hi,

But I still need to resolve the latest checkpoint and pass that as an argument. 
My question still is that why all this can not be handled by Flink core? Why 
not just have parameters enable savepoints, location of savepoints and state 
backend and system would then automatically do checkpoints / savepoints on exit 
and also start from the first available checkpoint?

Br,
Henkka

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Stefan Richter 
<s.rich...@data-artisans.com<mailto:s.rich...@data-artisans.com>> wrote:
Hi,

but I think this is exactly the case for externalized checkpoints. Periodic 
savepoints are problematic because, their lifecycle is meant to be under the 
control of the user and Flink can not make any assumptions when they can be 
dropped. So in the conservative scenario, savepoints would quickly pile up. 
With externalized checkpoints, you can control the number of retained 
checkpoints. if you set this number to one, that should be exactly what you 
want.

As for rescalability, this limitation is more of a future than a current 
problem. Right now, you should be able to rescale from all externalized 
checkpoints. But this might not hold in the future, because you can optimize 
checkpoints in some cases if this is feature dropped.

Right now, externalized checkpoints should offer all that you want.

Best,
Stefan

Am 10.08.2017 um 11:46 schrieb Henri Heiskanen 
<henri.heiska...@gmail.com<mailto:henri.heiska...@gmail.com>>:

Hi,

It would be super helpful if Flink would provide out of the box functionality 
for writing automatic savepoints and then starting from the latest savepoint. 
If external checkpoints would support rescaling then 1st requirement is met, 
but one would still need to e.g. find the latest checkpoint from some folder 
and pass that as argument. We are currently writing our own functionality for 
this. Why not just tell Flink that this job uses persistent states and default 
functionality is then to start from the latest snapshot.

Br,
Henri H

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:20 AM, Stefan Richter 
<s.rich...@data-artisans.com<mailto:s.rich...@data-artisans.com>> wrote:
Hi,

I would explain the main conceptual difference as follows:

- Checkpoints are periodically triggered by the system for fault tolerance. 
They are used to automatically recover from failures. Because of their 
automatic and periodical nature, they should be lightweight to produce and will 
restore the same job without any changes to the jobgraph, parallelism, etc. 
Checkpoints are usually dropped after the job was terminated by the user.

- Savepoints are triggered by the user to store the state of the job for a 
manual resume and backup. Savepoints are usually not periodical but typically 
taken before some user actions to the job or the system. For example, this 
could be an update of your Flink version, changing your job graph, changing 
parallelism, forking a second job like for a red/blue deployment, and so on.  
Of course, savepoints must survive job termination. Conceptually, savepoints 
can be a bit more expensive to produce, because they should have a format that 
makes all those „changes to the job“ features possible.

Besides this conceptual difference, the current implementations are basically 
using the same code and produce the same „format". However, there is currently 
one exception from this, but I would expect more differences in the future. 
This exception are incremental checkpoints with the RocksDB state backend. They 
are using some RocksDB internal format instead of Flink’s „savepoint format“. 
This makes them the first instance of a more lightweight checkpointing 
mechanism, compared to savepoints, at the cost of dropping support for certain 
features such as changing the parallelism.

Furthermore, there also exists „externalized checkpoints“, which are somewhere 
in between checkpoints and savepoints. They are triggered by Flink, but can 
survive job termination and can then be used by the user to restart the job, 
similar to savepoints. They use the checkpointing code path, so there are for 
example externalized incremental checkpoints. However, exactly like a normal 
checkpoints, they might also lack certain features like rescalability.

Best,
Stefan

Am 10.08.2017 um 05:32 schrieb Raja.Aravapalli 
<raja.aravapa...@target.com<mailto:raja.aravapa...@target.com>>:

Hi,

Can someone please help me understand the difference between Flink's 
Checkpoints & Savepoints.

While I read the documentation, couldn't understand the difference! :s


Thanks a lot.



Regards,
Raja.





Reply via email to