Hi Hong,
Thanks for pointing that out, no we are not
deprecating getFatalExceptionCons(). I have updated the FLIP
Best Regards
Ahmed Hamdy


On Mon, 20 May 2024 at 15:40, Hong Liang <h...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Ahmed,
> Thanks for putting this together! Should we still be marking
> getFatalExceptionCons() as @Deprecated in this FLIP, if we are not
> providing a replacement?
>
> Regards,
> Hong
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 7:58 PM Ahmed Hamdy <hamdy10...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
> > yes there error classification was initially left to sink implementers to
> > handle while we provided utilities to classify[1] and bubble up[2] fatal
> > exceptions to avoid retrying them.
> > Additionally some sink implementations provide an option to short circuit
> > the failures by exposing a `failOnError` flag as in
> KinesisStreamsSink[3],
> > however this FLIP scope doesn't include any changes for retry mechanisms.
> >
> > 1-
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/015867803ff0c128b1c67064c41f37ca0731ed86/flink-connectors/flink-connector-base/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/connector/base/sink/throwable/FatalExceptionClassifier.java#L32
> > 2-
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/015867803ff0c128b1c67064c41f37ca0731ed86/flink-connectors/flink-connector-base/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/connector/base/sink/writer/AsyncSinkWriter.java#L533
> > 3-
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-aws/blob/c6e0abb65a0e51b40dd218b890a111886fbf797f/flink-connector-aws/flink-connector-aws-kinesis-streams/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/connector/kinesis/sink/KinesisStreamsSinkWriter.java#L106
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Ahmed Hamdy
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 13 May 2024 at 16:20, David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I wonder if the way that the async request fails could be a retriable
> or
> > > non-retriable error, so it would retry only for retriable (transient)
> > > errors (like IOExceptions) . I see some talk on the internet around
> > > retriable SQL errors.
> > >  If this was the case then we may need configuration to limit the
> number
> > > of retries of retriable errors.
> > >             Kind regards, David
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Muhammet Orazov <mor+fl...@morazow.com.INVALID>
> > > Date: Monday, 13 May 2024 at 10:30
> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org>
> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-451: Refactor Async sink API
> > > Great, thanks for clarifying!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Muhammet
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2024-05-06 13:40, Ahmed Hamdy wrote:
> > > > Hi Muhammet,
> > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > >
> > > >> Could you please add more here why it is harder? Would the
> > > >> `completeExceptionally`
> > > >> method be related to it? Maybe you can add usage example for it
> also.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > this is mainly due to the current implementation of fatal exception
> > > > failures which depends on base `getFatalExceptionConsumer` method
> that
> > > > is
> > > > decoupled from the actual called method `submitRequestEntries`, Since
> > > > this
> > > > is now not the primary concern of the FLIP, I have removed it from
> the
> > > > motivation so that the scope is defined around introducing the
> timeout
> > > > configuration.
> > > >
> > > >> Should we add a list of possible connectors that this FLIP would
> > > >> improve?
> > > >
> > > > Good call, I have added under migration plan.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards
> > > > Ahmed Hamdy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 08:49, Muhammet Orazov <mor+fl...@morazow.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hey Ahmed,
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for the FLIP! +1 (non-binding)
> > > >>
> > > >> > Additionally the current interface for passing fatal exceptions
> and
> > > >> > retrying records relies on java consumers which makes it harder to
> > > >> > understand.
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you please add more here why it is harder? Would the
> > > >> `completeExceptionally`
> > > >> method be related to it? Maybe you can add usage example for it
> also.
> > > >>
> > > >> > we should proceed by adding support in all supporting connector
> > repos.
> > > >>
> > > >> Should we add list of possible connectors that this FLIP would
> > > >> improve?
> > > >>
> > > >> Best,
> > > >> Muhammet
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2024-04-29 14:08, Ahmed Hamdy wrote:
> > > >> > Hi all,
> > > >> > I would like to start a discussion on FLIP-451[1]
> > > >> > The proposal comes on encountering a couple of issues while
> working
> > > >> > with
> > > >> > implementers for Async Sink.
> > > >> > The FLIP mainly proposes a new API similar to AsyncFunction and
> > > >> > ResultFuture as well as introducing timeout handling for AsyncSink
> > > >> > requests.
> > > >> > The FLIP targets 1.20 with backward compatible changes and we
> should
> > > >> > proceed by adding support in all supporting connector repos.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 1-
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-451%3A+Refactor+Async+Sink+API
> > > >> > Best Regards
> > > >> > Ahmed Hamdy
> > > >>
> > >
> > > Unless otherwise stated above:
> > >
> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited
> > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to