[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24125?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Xintong Song updated FLINK-24125:
---------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 1.18.0
(was: 1.17.0)
> Rethink relationship between DeclarativeSlotPool and *Bridge
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-24125
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24125
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Technical Debt
> Components: Runtime / Coordination
> Affects Versions: 1.14.0, 1.15.0
> Reporter: Chesnay Schepler
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.18.0
>
>
> The {{DeclarativeSlotPoolBridge}} bridges the old non-declarative slot
> allocation protocol of the {{DefaultScheduler}} with the
> {{DeclarativeSlotPool}}. It increases requirements when a slot is requested,
> and reduces the requirements when the slot is freed.
> To support this the {{DeclarativeSlotPool}} API was designed such that the
> bridge is provided with the resource profile of freed slots, such that it can
> subsequently reduce the requirements.
> The main benefit of this is that the bridge does not have to do any resource
> book-keeping; the downside is that this pushes {{DefaultScheduler}}
> requirements into the declarative resource management stack.
> We should rethink whether it wouldn't be worth to extend the book-keeping in
> the bridge such that the pool does no longer have to deal with this.
> One thing to investigate is whether this is easily possible, specifically
> whether a simple book-keeping (let's say, a Map<SlotRequestId,
> ResourceProfile>) would be sufficient or whether there are edge-cases this
> couldn't support.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
