A quick question, does network memory treated as managed memory now? Or in the future?
Best, Kurt On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 5:32 PM Xintong Song <tonysong...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi devs, > > I'd like to bring the discussion over FLIP-141[1], which proposes how > managed memory should be shared by various use cases within a slot. This is > an extension to FLIP-53[2], where we assumed that RocksDB state backend and > batch operators are the only use cases of managed memory for streaming and > batch jobs respectively, which is no longer true with the introduction of > Python UDFs. > > Please notice that we have not reached consensus between two different > designs. The major part of this FLIP describes one of the candidates, while > the alternative is discussed in the section "Rejected Alternatives". We are > hoping to borrow intelligence from the community to help us resolve the > disagreement. > > Any feedback would be appreciated. > > Thank you~ > > Xintong Song > > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-141%3A+Intra-Slot+Managed+Memory+Sharing#FLIP141:IntraSlotManagedMemorySharing-compatibility > > [2] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-53%3A+Fine+Grained+Operator+Resource+Management >
