Hi Joao, Thanks for bringing this up. Exposing internal domain instances depends on your requirements. Technically, it is even possible to expose the RuntimeContext [1] (must be considered very carefully). Since you mentioned that you only need to know if objectReuse is enabled, how about just expose isObjectReuseEnabled instead of the whole ExecutionConfig? The idea is to shrink the scope as small as possible to satisfy the requirement. If more information from ExecutionConfig is needed later, we still can refactor the code properly according to the strong motivation.
Best regards, Jing [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/560b4612735a2b9cd3b5db88adf5cb223e85535b/flink-streaming-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/runtime/operators/sink/SinkWriterOperator.java#L279 On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 6:19 PM João Boto <eskabe...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Gunnar, > Thanks for your time and response... > > I think the problem you want to solve is the exposure of the > ExecutionConfig (that can be mutated) no? > The configuration is not mutated, we only need to know if objectReuse is > enable. > This is already expose on RuntimeContext we think to keep it similar to it > to simplify any migrations, but as said, for this migration from > ExecutionConfig we only need the isObjectReuseEnabled, and we could expose > only this configuration.. > > Best regards, > > > On 2023/01/13 15:50:09 Gunnar Morling wrote: > > Hey Joao, > > > > Thanks for this FLIP! One question on the proposed interface changes: > > is it expected that the configuration is *mutated* via the InitContext > > passed to Sink::createWriter()? If that's not the case, how about > > establishing a read-only contract representing the current > > configuration and passing in that one instead? That would probably > > deserve its own FLIP upon which yours here then would depend. Later > > on, other contracts which effectively shouldn't modify a config could > > use that one, too. > > > > Note I don't mean to stall your efforts here, but I thought it'd be a > > good idea to bring it up and gauge the general interest in this. > > > > Best, > > > > --Gunnar > > > > Am Fr., 13. Jan. 2023 um 15:17 Uhr schrieb Joao Boto <b...@boto.pro>: > > > > > > Hi flink devs, > > > > > > I'd like to start a discussion thread for FLIP-287[1]. > > > This comes from an offline discussion with @Lijie Wang, from > FLIP-239[2] > > > specially for the sink[3]. > > > > > > Basically to expose the ExecutionConfig and JobId on > SinkV2#InitContext. > > > This changes are necessary to correct migrate the current sinks to > SinkV2 > > > like JdbcSink, KafkaTableSink and so on, that relies on RuntimeContext > > > > > > Comments are welcome! > > > Thanks, > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=240880853 > > > [2] > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=217386271 > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-25421 > > >
