nicoweidner commented on a change in pull request #17474: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/17474#discussion_r733608288
########## File path: flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/dispatcher/TriggerSavepointParameters.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.flink.runtime.dispatcher; + +import org.apache.flink.api.common.JobID; +import org.apache.flink.api.common.time.Time; + +import static org.apache.flink.util.Preconditions.checkNotNull; + +class TriggerSavepointParameters { Review comment: I don't think I really understand that suggestion. With a `TriggerSavepointFunction` interface, wouldn't I still need either this class or use all four single parameters again in the lambda expressions? Can you share a snippet of how you imagine it to be used? Another point I like about this class is having a build instead of passing just a list of arguments to a constructor. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@flink.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
