[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-26306?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17496551#comment-17496551
 ] 

Roman Khachatryan commented on FLINK-26306:
-------------------------------------------

[~yunta] after materialization, triggering does start, but then it's stuck in 
location initialization. 
In the UI, it's shown as long checkpoint duration (because trigger timestamp is 
generated in the very beginning). In the logs, "triggering" is printed with a 
delay. Most importantly, checkpointing is delayed and end-to-en latency 
increases.

Batching deletions helps by occupying less threads and leaving more for the new 
checkpoint.

> Triggered checkpoints can be delayed by discarding shared state
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-26306
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-26306
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Runtime / Checkpointing
>    Affects Versions: 1.15.0, 1.14.3
>            Reporter: Roman Khachatryan
>            Assignee: Roman Khachatryan
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 1.15.0
>
>
> Quick note: CheckpointCleaner is not involved here.
> When a checkpoint is subsumed, SharedStateRegistry schedules its unused 
> shared state for async deletion. It uses common IO pool for this and adds a 
> Runnable per state handle. ( see SharedStateRegistryImpl.scheduleAsyncDelete)
> When a checkpoint is started, CheckpointCoordinator uses the same thread pool 
> to initialize the location for it. (see 
> CheckpointCoordinator.initializeCheckpoint)
> The thread pool is of fixed size 
> [jobmanager.io-pool.size|https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/config/#jobmanager-io-pool-size];
>  by default it's the number of CPU cores) and uses FIFO queue for tasks.
> When there is a spike in state deletion, the next checkpoint is delayed 
> waiting for an available IO thread.
> Back-pressure seems reasonable here (similar to CheckpointCleaner); however, 
> this shared state deletion could be spread across multiple subsequent 
> checkpoints, not neccesarily the next one.
> ---- 
> I believe the issue is an pre-existing one; but it particularly affects 
> changelog state backend, because 1) such spikes are likely there; 2) 
> workloads are latency sensitive.
> In the tests, checkpoint duration grows from seconds to minutes immediately 
> after the materialization.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

Reply via email to