rkhachatryan commented on code in PR #27688:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/27688#discussion_r2879116848
##########
flink-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/test/checkpointing/UnalignedCheckpointITCase.java:
##########
@@ -277,7 +277,15 @@ public UnalignedCheckpointITCase(
@Test
public void execute() throws Exception {
- execute(settings);
+ // Phase 1: Run with WAIT_FOR_CHECKPOINT_AND_CANCEL to produce a
checkpoint
+ settings.setCheckpointGenerationMode(
+ CheckpointGenerationMode.WAIT_FOR_CHECKPOINT_AND_CANCEL);
+ String checkpointPath = super.execute(settings);
+
+ // Phase 2: Restore from the checkpoint and run normally
+ settings.setCheckpointGenerationMode(CheckpointGenerationMode.NONE);
+ settings.setRestoreCheckpoint(checkpointPath);
+ super.execute(settings);
Review Comment:
Should we add this as a new test to preserve test coverage for non-restore
case?
##########
flink-tests/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/test/checkpointing/UnalignedCheckpointRescaleITCase.java:
##########
@@ -549,7 +561,8 @@ public static Object[][] getScaleFactors() {
// captured in-flight records, see FLINK-31963.
Object[][] parameters =
new Object[][] {
- new Object[] {"downscale", Topology.CUSTOM_PARTITIONER, 3,
2, 0L},
+ // Disable CUSTOM_PARTITIONER since it does not work well,
see FLINK-39162
+ // new Object[] {"downscale", Topology.CUSTOM_PARTITIONER,
3, 2, 0L},
Review Comment:
IIRC custom partitioner is not guaranteed to work with Unaligned checkpoints.
Should we remove`Topology.CUSTOM_PARTITIONER` and the associated code
completely?
--
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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
