[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5285?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15732626#comment-15732626
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-5285:
---------------------------------------
Github user StephanEwen commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/2963#discussion_r91532008
--- Diff:
flink-streaming-java/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/streaming/runtime/io/BarrierBuffer.java
---
@@ -422,7 +425,7 @@ private void beginNewAlignment(long checkpointId, int
channelIndex) throws IOExc
startOfAlignmentTimestamp = System.nanoTime();
if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug("Starting stream alignment for checkpoint " +
checkpointId);
+ LOG.debug("Starting stream alignment for checkpoint
{}.", checkpointId);
--- End diff --
I am not a super big fan of that change: Given that this is guarded by a
`LOG.isDebugEnabled()` the prior version was actually more efficient than the
new one. Saves a boxing operation and a parsing step.
> CancelCheckpointMarker flood when using at least once mode
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-5285
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5285
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: State Backends, Checkpointing
> Affects Versions: 1.2.0, 1.1.3
> Reporter: Till Rohrmann
> Assignee: Till Rohrmann
> Fix For: 1.2.0, 1.1.4
>
>
> When using at least once mode ({{BarrierTracker}}), then an interleaved
> arrival of cancellation barriers at the {{BarrierTracker}} of two consecutive
> checkpoints can trigger a flood of {{CancelCheckpointMarkers}}.
> The following sequence is problematic:
> {code}
> Cancel(1, 0),
> Cancel(2, 0),
> Cancel(1, 1),
> Cancel(2, 1),
> Cancel(1, 2),
> Cancel(2, 2)
> {code}
> with {{Cancel(checkpointId, channelId)}}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
