Thanks for the improvement proposal, I’m +1 for the change! Best, Stefan
> On 30. Apr 2024, at 15:23, Roman Khachatryan <ro...@apache.org> wrote: > > Thanks for the proposal, I definitely see the need for this improvement, +1. > > Regards, > Roman > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 3:11 PM Piotr Nowojski <pnowoj...@apache.org > <mailto:pnowoj...@apache.org>> wrote: > >> Hi Yanfei, >> >> Thanks for the feedback! >> >>> 1. Currently when AbstractStreamOperator or AbstractStreamOperatorV2 >>> processes a watermark, the watermark will be sent to downstream, if >>> the `InternalTimerServiceImpl#advanceWatermark` is interrupted, when >>> is the watermark sent downstream? >> >> The watermark would be outputted by an operator only once all relevant >> timers are fired. >> In other words, if firing of timers is interrupted a continuation mail to >> continue firing those >> interrupted timers is created. Watermark will be emitted downstream at the >> end of that >> continuation mail. >> >>> 2. IIUC, processing-timer's firing is also encapsulated into mail and >>> executed in mailbox. Is processing-timer allowed to be interrupted? >> >> Yes, both firing processing and even time timers share the same code and >> both will >> support interruptions in the same way. Actually I've renamed the FLIP from >> >>> Interruptible watermarks processing >> >> to: >> >>> Interruptible timers firing >> >> to make this more clear. >> >> Best, >> Piotrek >> >> wt., 30 kwi 2024 o 06:08 Yanfei Lei <fredia...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >> >>> Hi Piotrek, >>> >>> Thanks for this proposal. It looks like it will shorten the checkpoint >>> duration, especially in the case of back pressure. +1 for it! I'd >>> like to ask some questions to understand your thoughts more precisely. >>> >>> 1. Currently when AbstractStreamOperator or AbstractStreamOperatorV2 >>> processes a watermark, the watermark will be sent to downstream, if >>> the `InternalTimerServiceImpl#advanceWatermark` is interrupted, when >>> is the watermark sent downstream? >>> 2. IIUC, processing-timer's firing is also encapsulated into mail and >>> executed in mailbox. Is processing-timer allowed to be interrupted? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Yanfei >>> >>> Piotr Nowojski <pnowoj...@apache.org> 于2024年4月29日周一 21:57写道： >>> >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I would like to start a discussion on FLIP-443: Interruptible watermark >>>> processing. >>>> >>>> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/qgn9EQ&source=gmail-imap&ust=1715088370000000&usg=AOvVaw0eTZDvLwdZUDai5GqoSGrD >>>> >>>> This proposal tries to make Flink's subtask thread more responsive when >>>> processing watermarks/firing timers, and make those operations >>>> interruptible/break them apart into smaller steps. At the same time, >> the >>>> proposed solution could be potentially adopted in other places in the >>> code >>>> base as well, to solve similar problems with other flatMap-like >> operators >>>> (non windowed joins, aggregations, CepOperator, ...). >>>> >>>> I'm looking forward to your thoughts. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Piotrek
