1996fanrui commented on code in PR #19723: URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/19723#discussion_r876515484
########## flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/checkpoint/channel/ChannelStateWriteRequest.java: ########## @@ -72,6 +74,51 @@ static ChannelStateWriteRequest write( (writer, buffer) -> writer.writeOutput(info, buffer)); } + static ChannelStateWriteRequest write( + long checkpointId, + ResultSubpartitionInfo info, + CompletableFuture<List<Buffer>> dataFuture) { + return buildFutureWriteRequest( + checkpointId, + "writeOutputFuture", + dataFuture, + (writer, buffer) -> writer.writeOutput(info, buffer)); + } + + static ChannelStateWriteRequest buildFutureWriteRequest( + long checkpointId, + String name, + CompletableFuture<List<Buffer>> dataFuture, + BiConsumer<ChannelStateCheckpointWriter, Buffer> bufferConsumer) { + return new CheckpointInProgressRequest( + name, + checkpointId, + writer -> { + try { + List<Buffer> buffers = dataFuture.get(); + if (buffers == null || buffers.isEmpty()) { Review Comment: The barrier will be send to downstream quickly when the back pressure isn't severe. For this case, I execute `channelStateFuture.complete(null)` in `PipelinedSubpartition#completeTimeoutableCheckpointBarrier` to reduce create some useless Objects(EmptyLists). Do you think it should be changed to `channelStateFuture.complete(EmptyList)`? -- 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