XComp commented on code in PR #24382:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/24382#discussion_r1502820181
##########
flink-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/executiongraph/DefaultExecutionGraph.java:
##########
@@ -1031,34 +1028,18 @@ public void suspend(Throwable suspensionCause) {
return;
} else if (transitionState(state, JobStatus.SUSPENDED,
suspensionCause)) {
initFailureCause(suspensionCause, System.currentTimeMillis());
+ resetExecutionGraph(ExecutionJobVertex::suspend)
+ .whenComplete(
+ (Void ignored, Throwable throwable) -> {
+ if (throwable != null) {
+ LOG.debug(
+ "Could not properly suspend the
execution graph.",
+ throwable);
+ }
- incrementRestarts();
-
- // cancel ongoing scheduling action
- if (schedulingFuture != null) {
- schedulingFuture.cancel(false);
- }
- final ArrayList<CompletableFuture<Void>>
executionJobVertexTerminationFutures =
- new ArrayList<>(verticesInCreationOrder.size());
-
- for (ExecutionJobVertex ejv : verticesInCreationOrder) {
- executionJobVertexTerminationFutures.add(ejv.suspend());
- }
-
- final ConjunctFuture<Void> jobVerticesTerminationFuture =
-
FutureUtils.waitForAll(executionJobVertexTerminationFutures);
-
- checkState(jobVerticesTerminationFuture.isDone(), "Suspend needs
to happen atomically");
Review Comment:
Wait, isn't that obsolete? I deliberately removed it because the
`waitForAll` has it already covered, i.e. `waitForAll` waits for the for all
futures? :thinking: to be fair, we don't have a unit test to cover the class.
--
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
