Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi folks, Thanks for the informative discussion. @Allison @Becket currently the FLIP only focuses on Yarn, but after reading all your discussions, if I am not mistaken, both Yarn and Kubernetes clusters should be supported. Does it make sense to update the FLIP accordingly? Best regards, Jing On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 10:29 AM Becket Qin wrote: > Hi Weihua, > > Just want to clarify. "client.attached.after.submission" is going to be a > pure client side configuration. > > On the cluster side, it is only "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit" > controlling whether the cluster will shutdown or not when an attached > client is disconnected. In order to honor this configuration, the cluster > needs to know if the client submitting the job is attached or not. But the > cluster will not retrieve this information by reading the configuration of > "client.attached.after.submission". In fact this configuration should not > even be visible to the cluster. The cluster only knows if a client is > attached or not when a client submits a job. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 2:35 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > Thanks for the clarification. > > > > My key point is the meaning of the "submission" in > > "client.attached.after.submission". > > At first glance, I thought only job submissions were taken into account. > > After your clarification, this option also works for cluster submissions. > > > > It's fine for me. > > > > Best, > > Weihua > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 8:35 AM Becket Qin wrote: > > > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. From the doc, it looks like the current > > > behaviors of "execution.attached=true" between Yarn and K8S session > > > cluster are exactly the opposite. For YARN it basically means the > cluster > > > will shutdown if the client disconnects. For K8S, it means the cluster > > will > > > not shutdown until a client explicitly stops it. This sounds like a bad > > > situation to me and needs to be fixed. > > > > > > My guess is that the YARN behavior here is the original intended > > behavior, > > > while K8S reused the configuration for a different purpose. If we > > deprecate > > > the execution.attached config here. The behavior would be: > > > > > > For YARN session clusters: > > > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > > > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > > > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", i.e. the cluster will keep > > > running until explicitly stopped. > > > > > > I am not sure what the current behavior of "execution.attached=true" + > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false" is. Supposedly, it should > be > > > equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", which means > > > "execution.attached" only controls the client side behavior, while the > > > cluster side behavior is controlled by > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit". > > > > > > For K8S session clusters: > > > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false". > > > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > > > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > > > > > > This will make the same config behave the same for YARN and K8S. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:04 PM Weihua Hu > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > > > 'execution.attached' can be used to attach an existing cluster and > stop > > > it > > > > [1][2], > > > > which is not related to job submission. So does YARN session mode[3]. > > > > IMO, this behavior should not be controlled by the new option > > > > 'client.attached.after.submission'. > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/a85ffc491874ecf3410f747df3ed09f61df52ac6/flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/cli/KubernetesSessionCli.java#L126 > > > > [3] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/yarn/#session-mode > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Weihua > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:16 PM Becket Qin > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > > > > > > > Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of > > > > > `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a > > job > > > > to > > > > > that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job > > > > > submission? > > > > > > > > > > Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of > > > > > 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'.
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Weihua, Just want to clarify. "client.attached.after.submission" is going to be a pure client side configuration. On the cluster side, it is only "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit" controlling whether the cluster will shutdown or not when an attached client is disconnected. In order to honor this configuration, the cluster needs to know if the client submitting the job is attached or not. But the cluster will not retrieve this information by reading the configuration of "client.attached.after.submission". In fact this configuration should not even be visible to the cluster. The cluster only knows if a client is attached or not when a client submits a job. Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 2:35 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > Hi, Jiangjie > > Thanks for the clarification. > > My key point is the meaning of the "submission" in > "client.attached.after.submission". > At first glance, I thought only job submissions were taken into account. > After your clarification, this option also works for cluster submissions. > > It's fine for me. > > Best, > Weihua > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 8:35 AM Becket Qin wrote: > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > Thanks for the explanation. From the doc, it looks like the current > > behaviors of "execution.attached=true" between Yarn and K8S session > > cluster are exactly the opposite. For YARN it basically means the cluster > > will shutdown if the client disconnects. For K8S, it means the cluster > will > > not shutdown until a client explicitly stops it. This sounds like a bad > > situation to me and needs to be fixed. > > > > My guess is that the YARN behavior here is the original intended > behavior, > > while K8S reused the configuration for a different purpose. If we > deprecate > > the execution.attached config here. The behavior would be: > > > > For YARN session clusters: > > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", i.e. the cluster will keep > > running until explicitly stopped. > > > > I am not sure what the current behavior of "execution.attached=true" + > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false" is. Supposedly, it should be > > equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", which means > > "execution.attached" only controls the client side behavior, while the > > cluster side behavior is controlled by > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit". > > > > For K8S session clusters: > > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false". > > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > > > > This will make the same config behave the same for YARN and K8S. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:04 PM Weihua Hu > wrote: > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > 'execution.attached' can be used to attach an existing cluster and stop > > it > > > [1][2], > > > which is not related to job submission. So does YARN session mode[3]. > > > IMO, this behavior should not be controlled by the new option > > > 'client.attached.after.submission'. > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/a85ffc491874ecf3410f747df3ed09f61df52ac6/flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/cli/KubernetesSessionCli.java#L126 > > > [3] > > > > > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/yarn/#session-mode > > > > > > Best, > > > Weihua > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:16 PM Becket Qin > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > > > > > Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of > > > > `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a > job > > > to > > > > that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job > > > > submission? > > > > > > > > Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of > > > > 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'. So if a client submitted a job > > in > > > > attached mode, and this `execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit` is set > to > > > > true, the cluster will shutdown if the client detaches from the > > cluster. > > > Is > > > > this sufficient? Or do you mean we need another independent > > > configuration? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:20 PM Weihua Hu > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Jiangjie > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user > sensible > > > > > behaviors you described. > > > > > > > > > > I
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi, Jiangjie Thanks for the clarification. My key point is the meaning of the "submission" in "client.attached.after.submission". At first glance, I thought only job submissions were taken into account. After your clarification, this option also works for cluster submissions. It's fine for me. Best, Weihua On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 8:35 AM Becket Qin wrote: > Hi Weihua, > > Thanks for the explanation. From the doc, it looks like the current > behaviors of "execution.attached=true" between Yarn and K8S session > cluster are exactly the opposite. For YARN it basically means the cluster > will shutdown if the client disconnects. For K8S, it means the cluster will > not shutdown until a client explicitly stops it. This sounds like a bad > situation to me and needs to be fixed. > > My guess is that the YARN behavior here is the original intended behavior, > while K8S reused the configuration for a different purpose. If we deprecate > the execution.attached config here. The behavior would be: > > For YARN session clusters: > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", i.e. the cluster will keep > running until explicitly stopped. > > I am not sure what the current behavior of "execution.attached=true" + > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false" is. Supposedly, it should be > equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", which means > "execution.attached" only controls the client side behavior, while the > cluster side behavior is controlled by > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit". > > For K8S session clusters: > 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false". > 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to > "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + > "client.attached.after.submission=true". > > This will make the same config behave the same for YARN and K8S. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:04 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > 'execution.attached' can be used to attach an existing cluster and stop > it > > [1][2], > > which is not related to job submission. So does YARN session mode[3]. > > IMO, this behavior should not be controlled by the new option > > 'client.attached.after.submission'. > > > > [1] > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > > [2] > > > > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/a85ffc491874ecf3410f747df3ed09f61df52ac6/flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/cli/KubernetesSessionCli.java#L126 > > [3] > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/yarn/#session-mode > > > > Best, > > Weihua > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:16 PM Becket Qin wrote: > > > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > > > Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of > > > `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a job > > to > > > that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job > > > submission? > > > > > > Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of > > > 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'. So if a client submitted a job > in > > > attached mode, and this `execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit` is set to > > > true, the cluster will shutdown if the client detaches from the > cluster. > > Is > > > this sufficient? Or do you mean we need another independent > > configuration? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:20 PM Weihua Hu > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Jiangjie > > > > > > > > Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user sensible > > > > behaviors you described. > > > > > > > > I would like to bring up a point. > > > > > > > > Currently, 'execution.attached' is not only used for submitting jobs, > > > > But also for starting a new cluster (YARN and Kubernetes). If it's > > true, > > > > the starting cluster script will > > > > wait for the user to input the next command (quit or stop). > > > > > > > > In my opinion, this behavior should have an independent option > besides > > > > "client.attached.after.submission" for control. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Weihua > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:07 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the > > > > > execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it > > also > > > > make > > > > > sense to me. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ron, > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Weihua, Thanks for the explanation. From the doc, it looks like the current behaviors of "execution.attached=true" between Yarn and K8S session cluster are exactly the opposite. For YARN it basically means the cluster will shutdown if the client disconnects. For K8S, it means the cluster will not shutdown until a client explicitly stops it. This sounds like a bad situation to me and needs to be fixed. My guess is that the YARN behavior here is the original intended behavior, while K8S reused the configuration for a different purpose. If we deprecate the execution.attached config here. The behavior would be: For YARN session clusters: 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + "client.attached.after.submission=true". 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", i.e. the cluster will keep running until explicitly stopped. I am not sure what the current behavior of "execution.attached=true" + "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false" is. Supposedly, it should be equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false", which means "execution.attached" only controls the client side behavior, while the cluster side behavior is controlled by "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit". For K8S session clusters: 1. Current "execution.attached=true" would be equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=false". 2. Current "execution.attached=false" would be equivalent to "execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit=true" + "client.attached.after.submission=true". This will make the same config behave the same for YARN and K8S. Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 11:04 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > Hi, Jiangjie > > 'execution.attached' can be used to attach an existing cluster and stop it > [1][2], > which is not related to job submission. So does YARN session mode[3]. > IMO, this behavior should not be controlled by the new option > 'client.attached.after.submission'. > > [1] > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > [2] > > https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/a85ffc491874ecf3410f747df3ed09f61df52ac6/flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/cli/KubernetesSessionCli.java#L126 > [3] > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/yarn/#session-mode > > Best, > Weihua > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:16 PM Becket Qin wrote: > > > Hi Weihua, > > > > Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of > > `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a job > to > > that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job > > submission? > > > > Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of > > 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'. So if a client submitted a job in > > attached mode, and this `execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit` is set to > > true, the cluster will shutdown if the client detaches from the cluster. > Is > > this sufficient? Or do you mean we need another independent > configuration? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:20 PM Weihua Hu > wrote: > > > > > Hi Jiangjie > > > > > > Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user sensible > > > behaviors you described. > > > > > > I would like to bring up a point. > > > > > > Currently, 'execution.attached' is not only used for submitting jobs, > > > But also for starting a new cluster (YARN and Kubernetes). If it's > true, > > > the starting cluster script will > > > wait for the user to input the next command (quit or stop). > > > > > > In my opinion, this behavior should have an independent option besides > > > "client.attached.after.submission" for control. > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > Weihua > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:07 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > > > Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the > > > > execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it > also > > > make > > > > sense to me. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > > > > > > > > > Hi Ron, > > > > > > > > > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the > > > execution.attached > > > > to > > > > > determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can > > always > > > > > include the information of whether it's an attached client or not > in > > > the > > > > > JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, > there > > > > could > > > > > be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may > > not > > > > be > > > > > attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session > > > > cluster > > > > > does not work in this case, right? > > > > > > > > > > The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi, Jiangjie 'execution.attached' can be used to attach an existing cluster and stop it [1][2], which is not related to job submission. So does YARN session mode[3]. IMO, this behavior should not be controlled by the new option 'client.attached.after.submission'. [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode [2] https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/a85ffc491874ecf3410f747df3ed09f61df52ac6/flink-kubernetes/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/kubernetes/cli/KubernetesSessionCli.java#L126 [3] https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/yarn/#session-mode Best, Weihua On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 5:16 PM Becket Qin wrote: > Hi Weihua, > > Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of > `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a job to > that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job > submission? > > Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of > 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'. So if a client submitted a job in > attached mode, and this `execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit` is set to > true, the cluster will shutdown if the client detaches from the cluster. Is > this sufficient? Or do you mean we need another independent configuration? > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:20 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > > > Hi Jiangjie > > > > Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user sensible > > behaviors you described. > > > > I would like to bring up a point. > > > > Currently, 'execution.attached' is not only used for submitting jobs, > > But also for starting a new cluster (YARN and Kubernetes). If it's true, > > the starting cluster script will > > wait for the user to input the next command (quit or stop). > > > > In my opinion, this behavior should have an independent option besides > > "client.attached.after.submission" for control. > > > > > > Best, > > Weihua > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:07 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the > > > execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it also > > make > > > sense to me. > > > > > > Best, > > > Ron > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > > > > > > > Hi Ron, > > > > > > > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the > > execution.attached > > > to > > > > determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can > always > > > > include the information of whether it's an attached client or not in > > the > > > > JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, there > > > could > > > > be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may > not > > > be > > > > attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session > > > cluster > > > > does not work in this case, right? > > > > > > > > The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not always > > > honored. > > > > For example, if a session cluster was started with execution.attached > > set > > > > to false. And a client submits a job later to that session cluster > with > > > > execution.attached set to true. In this case, the cluster won't (and > > > > shouldn't) shutdown after the job finishes or the attached client > loses > > > > connection. So, in fact, the execution.attached configuration is only > > > > honored by the client, but not the cluster. Therefore, I think > removing > > > it > > > > makes sense. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:31 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As > you > > > say, > > > > > there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The > > > goal > > > > of > > > > > this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I > > also > > > > > agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached > is > > > not > > > > > only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says > > > that > > > > > this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in > the > > > > > future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think > > this > > > > is > > > > > correct and we should change the description in the corresponding > > > section > > > > > of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, > there > > > is a > > > > > compatibility issue here if we change it directly to > > > > > client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this > > clear > > > > in > > > > > the FLIP. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > > > > > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Weihua, Just want to clarify a little bit, what is the impact of `execution.attached` on a cluster startup before a client submits a job to that cluster? Does this config only become effective after a job submission? Currently, the cluster behavior has an independent config of 'execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit'. So if a client submitted a job in attached mode, and this `execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit` is set to true, the cluster will shutdown if the client detaches from the cluster. Is this sufficient? Or do you mean we need another independent configuration? Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 2:20 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > Hi Jiangjie > > Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user sensible > behaviors you described. > > I would like to bring up a point. > > Currently, 'execution.attached' is not only used for submitting jobs, > But also for starting a new cluster (YARN and Kubernetes). If it's true, > the starting cluster script will > wait for the user to input the next command (quit or stop). > > In my opinion, this behavior should have an independent option besides > "client.attached.after.submission" for control. > > > Best, > Weihua > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:07 AM liu ron wrote: > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the > > execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it also > make > > sense to me. > > > > Best, > > Ron > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > > > > > Hi Ron, > > > > > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the > execution.attached > > to > > > determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can always > > > include the information of whether it's an attached client or not in > the > > > JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, there > > could > > > be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may not > > be > > > attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session > > cluster > > > does not work in this case, right? > > > > > > The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not always > > honored. > > > For example, if a session cluster was started with execution.attached > set > > > to false. And a client submits a job later to that session cluster with > > > execution.attached set to true. In this case, the cluster won't (and > > > shouldn't) shutdown after the job finishes or the attached client loses > > > connection. So, in fact, the execution.attached configuration is only > > > honored by the client, but not the cluster. Therefore, I think removing > > it > > > makes sense. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:31 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > > > Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As you > > say, > > > > there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The > > goal > > > of > > > > this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I > also > > > > agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached is > > not > > > > only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says > > that > > > > this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in the > > > > future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think > this > > > is > > > > correct and we should change the description in the corresponding > > section > > > > of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, there > > is a > > > > compatibility issue here if we change it directly to > > > > client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this > clear > > > in > > > > the FLIP. > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > > > > > > > > > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > > > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the > > job > > > > > finishes or not. > > > > > > > > > > 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job > execution > > if > > > > the > > > > > client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the > > > > lifecycle > > > > > of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For > > > > example, > > > > > one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after > > the > > > > > client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon > > > client > > > > > connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. > > > > > > > > > > 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown > > the > > > > > Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, > i.e. > > > > > whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For > > > dedicated > > > > > clusters (application cluster or
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Jiangjie Sorry for the late reply, I fully agree with the three user sensible behaviors you described. I would like to bring up a point. Currently, 'execution.attached' is not only used for submitting jobs, But also for starting a new cluster (YARN and Kubernetes). If it's true, the starting cluster script will wait for the user to input the next command (quit or stop). In my opinion, this behavior should have an independent option besides "client.attached.after.submission" for control. Best, Weihua On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 10:07 AM liu ron wrote: > Hi, Jiangjie > > Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the > execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it also make > sense to me. > > Best, > Ron > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > > > Hi Ron, > > > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the execution.attached > to > > determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can always > > include the information of whether it's an attached client or not in the > > JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, there > could > > be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may not > be > > attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session > cluster > > does not work in this case, right? > > > > The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not always > honored. > > For example, if a session cluster was started with execution.attached set > > to false. And a client submits a job later to that session cluster with > > execution.attached set to true. In this case, the cluster won't (and > > shouldn't) shutdown after the job finishes or the attached client loses > > connection. So, in fact, the execution.attached configuration is only > > honored by the client, but not the cluster. Therefore, I think removing > it > > makes sense. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:31 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > > > Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As you > say, > > > there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The > goal > > of > > > this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I also > > > agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached is > not > > > only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says > that > > > this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in the > > > future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think this > > is > > > correct and we should change the description in the corresponding > section > > > of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, there > is a > > > compatibility issue here if we change it directly to > > > client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this clear > > in > > > the FLIP. > > > > > > Best, > > > Ron > > > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > > > > > > > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: > > > > > > > > 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the > job > > > > finishes or not. > > > > > > > > 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job execution > if > > > the > > > > client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the > > > lifecycle > > > > of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For > > > example, > > > > one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after > the > > > > client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon > > client > > > > connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. > > > > > > > > 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown > the > > > > Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. > > > > whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For > > dedicated > > > > clusters (application cluster or dedicated session clusters), the > > > lifecycle > > > > of the cluster should be bound with the job lifecycle. But for shared > > > > session clusters, the lifecycle of the Flink cluster should be > > > independent > > > > of the jobs running in it. > > > > > > > > As we can see, these three behaviors are sort of independent, the > > current > > > > configurations fail to support all the combination of wanted > behaviors. > > > > Ideally there should be three separate configurations, for example: > > > > - client.attached.after.submission and client.heartbeat.timeout > control > > > the > > > > behavior on the client side. > > > > - jobmanager.cancel-on-attached-client-exit controls the behavior of > > the > > > > job when an attached client lost connection. The client heartbeat > > timeout > > > > and attach-ness will be also passed to the JM upon job submission. > > > > -
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi, Jiangjie Thanks for your detailed explanation, I got your point. If the execution.attached is only used for client currently, removing it also make sense to me. Best, Ron Becket Qin 于2023年8月17日周四 07:37写道： > Hi Ron, > > Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the execution.attached to > determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can always > include the information of whether it's an attached client or not in the > JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, there could > be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may not be > attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session cluster > does not work in this case, right? > > The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not always honored. > For example, if a session cluster was started with execution.attached set > to false. And a client submits a job later to that session cluster with > execution.attached set to true. In this case, the cluster won't (and > shouldn't) shutdown after the job finishes or the attached client loses > connection. So, in fact, the execution.attached configuration is only > honored by the client, but not the cluster. Therefore, I think removing it > makes sense. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:31 AM liu ron wrote: > > > Hi, Jiangjie > > > > Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As you say, > > there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The goal > of > > this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I also > > agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached is not > > only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says that > > this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in the > > future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think this > is > > correct and we should change the description in the corresponding section > > of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, there is a > > compatibility issue here if we change it directly to > > client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this clear > in > > the FLIP. > > > > Best, > > Ron > > > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > > > > > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: > > > > > > 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the job > > > finishes or not. > > > > > > 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job execution if > > the > > > client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the > > lifecycle > > > of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For > > example, > > > one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after the > > > client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon > client > > > connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. > > > > > > 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown the > > > Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. > > > whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For > dedicated > > > clusters (application cluster or dedicated session clusters), the > > lifecycle > > > of the cluster should be bound with the job lifecycle. But for shared > > > session clusters, the lifecycle of the Flink cluster should be > > independent > > > of the jobs running in it. > > > > > > As we can see, these three behaviors are sort of independent, the > current > > > configurations fail to support all the combination of wanted behaviors. > > > Ideally there should be three separate configurations, for example: > > > - client.attached.after.submission and client.heartbeat.timeout control > > the > > > behavior on the client side. > > > - jobmanager.cancel-on-attached-client-exit controls the behavior of > the > > > job when an attached client lost connection. The client heartbeat > timeout > > > and attach-ness will be also passed to the JM upon job submission. > > > - cluster.shutdown-on-first-job-finishes *(*or > > > jobmanager.shutdown-cluster-after-job-finishes) controls the cluster > > > behavior after the job finishes normally / abnormally. This is a > cluster > > > level setting instead of a job level setting. Therefore it can only be > > set > > > when launching the cluster. > > > > > > The current code sort of combines config 2 and 3 into > > > execution.shutdown-on-attach-exit. > > > This assumes the the life cycle of the cluster is the same as the job > > when > > > the client is attached. This FLIP does not intend to change that. but > > using > > > the execution.attached config for the client behavior control looks > > > misleading. So this FLIP proposes to replace it with a more intuitive > > > config of client.attached.after.submission. This makes it clear that it > > is > >
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Ron, Isn't the cluster (session or per job) only using the execution.attached to determine whether the client is attached? If so, the client can always include the information of whether it's an attached client or not in the JobSubmissoinRequestBody, right? For a shared session cluster, there could be multiple clients submitting jobs to it. These clients may or may not be attached. A static execution.attached configuration for the session cluster does not work in this case, right? The current problem of execution.attached is that it is not always honored. For example, if a session cluster was started with execution.attached set to false. And a client submits a job later to that session cluster with execution.attached set to true. In this case, the cluster won't (and shouldn't) shutdown after the job finishes or the attached client loses connection. So, in fact, the execution.attached configuration is only honored by the client, but not the cluster. Therefore, I think removing it makes sense. Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 12:31 AM liu ron wrote: > Hi, Jiangjie > > Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As you say, > there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The goal of > this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I also > agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached is not > only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says that > this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in the > future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think this is > correct and we should change the description in the corresponding section > of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, there is a > compatibility issue here if we change it directly to > client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this clear in > the FLIP. > > Best, > Ron > > Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > > > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: > > > > 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the job > > finishes or not. > > > > 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job execution if > the > > client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the > lifecycle > > of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For > example, > > one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after the > > client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon client > > connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. > > > > 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown the > > Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. > > whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For dedicated > > clusters (application cluster or dedicated session clusters), the > lifecycle > > of the cluster should be bound with the job lifecycle. But for shared > > session clusters, the lifecycle of the Flink cluster should be > independent > > of the jobs running in it. > > > > As we can see, these three behaviors are sort of independent, the current > > configurations fail to support all the combination of wanted behaviors. > > Ideally there should be three separate configurations, for example: > > - client.attached.after.submission and client.heartbeat.timeout control > the > > behavior on the client side. > > - jobmanager.cancel-on-attached-client-exit controls the behavior of the > > job when an attached client lost connection. The client heartbeat timeout > > and attach-ness will be also passed to the JM upon job submission. > > - cluster.shutdown-on-first-job-finishes *(*or > > jobmanager.shutdown-cluster-after-job-finishes) controls the cluster > > behavior after the job finishes normally / abnormally. This is a cluster > > level setting instead of a job level setting. Therefore it can only be > set > > when launching the cluster. > > > > The current code sort of combines config 2 and 3 into > > execution.shutdown-on-attach-exit. > > This assumes the the life cycle of the cluster is the same as the job > when > > the client is attached. This FLIP does not intend to change that. but > using > > the execution.attached config for the client behavior control looks > > misleading. So this FLIP proposes to replace it with a more intuitive > > config of client.attached.after.submission. This makes it clear that it > is > > a configuration controlling the client side behavior, instead of the > > execution of the job. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:34 PM Weihua Hu > wrote: > > > > > Hi Allison > > > > > > Thanks for driving this FLIP. It's a valuable feature for batch jobs. > > > This helps keep "Drop Per-Job Mode [1]" going. > > > > > > +1 for this proposal. > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi, Jiangjie Sorry for late reply. Thank you for such a detailed response. As you say, there are three behaviours here for users and I agree with you. The goal of this FLIP is to clarify the behaviour of the client side, which I also agree with. However, as weihua said, the config execution.attached is not only for per-job mode, but also for session mode, but the FLIP says that this is only for per-job mode, and this config will be removed in the future because the per-job mode has been deprecated. I don't think this is correct and we should change the description in the corresponding section of the FLIP. Since execution.attached is used in session mode, there is a compatibility issue here if we change it directly to client.attached.after.submission, and I think we should make this clear in the FLIP. Best, Ron Becket Qin 于2023年8月14日周一 20:33写道： > Hi Ron and Weihua, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: > > 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the job > finishes or not. > > 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job execution if the > client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the lifecycle > of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For example, > one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after the > client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon client > connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. > > 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown the > Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. > whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For dedicated > clusters (application cluster or dedicated session clusters), the lifecycle > of the cluster should be bound with the job lifecycle. But for shared > session clusters, the lifecycle of the Flink cluster should be independent > of the jobs running in it. > > As we can see, these three behaviors are sort of independent, the current > configurations fail to support all the combination of wanted behaviors. > Ideally there should be three separate configurations, for example: > - client.attached.after.submission and client.heartbeat.timeout control the > behavior on the client side. > - jobmanager.cancel-on-attached-client-exit controls the behavior of the > job when an attached client lost connection. The client heartbeat timeout > and attach-ness will be also passed to the JM upon job submission. > - cluster.shutdown-on-first-job-finishes *(*or > jobmanager.shutdown-cluster-after-job-finishes) controls the cluster > behavior after the job finishes normally / abnormally. This is a cluster > level setting instead of a job level setting. Therefore it can only be set > when launching the cluster. > > The current code sort of combines config 2 and 3 into > execution.shutdown-on-attach-exit. > This assumes the the life cycle of the cluster is the same as the job when > the client is attached. This FLIP does not intend to change that. but using > the execution.attached config for the client behavior control looks > misleading. So this FLIP proposes to replace it with a more intuitive > config of client.attached.after.submission. This makes it clear that it is > a configuration controlling the client side behavior, instead of the > execution of the job. > > Thanks, > > Jiangjie (Becket) Qin > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:34 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > > > Hi Allison > > > > Thanks for driving this FLIP. It's a valuable feature for batch jobs. > > This helps keep "Drop Per-Job Mode [1]" going. > > > > +1 for this proposal. > > > > However, it seems that the change in this FLIP is not detailed enough. > > I have a few questions. > > > > 1. The config 'execution.attached' is not only used in per-job mode, > > but also in session mode to shutdown the cluster. IMHO, it's better to > > keep this option name. > > > > 2. This FLIP only mentions YARN mode. I believe this feature should > > work in both YARN and Kubernetes mode. > > > > 3. Within the attach mode, we support two features: > > execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit > > and client.heartbeat.timeout. These should also be taken into account. > > > > 4. The Application Mode will shut down once the job has been completed. > > So, if we use the flink client to poll job status via REST API for attach > > mode, > > there is a chance that the client will not be able to retrieve the job > > finish status. > > Perhaps FLINK-24113[3] will help with this. > > > > > > [1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-26000 > > [2] > > > > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > > [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24113 > > > > Best, > > Weihua > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:47 AM liu ron wrote: > > > > > Hi, Allison > > > > > > Thanks for driving this
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Ron and Weihua, Thanks for the feedback. There seem three user sensible behaviors that we are talking about: 1. The behavior on the client side, i.e. whether blocking until the job finishes or not. 2. The behavior of the submitted job, whether stop the job execution if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the lifecycle of the job with the connection status of the attached client. For example, one might want to keep a batch job running until finish even after the client connection is lost. But it makes sense to stop the job upon client connection lost if the job invokes collect() on a streaming job. 3. The behavior of the Flink cluster (JM and TMs), whether shutdown the Flink cluster if the client is detached from the Flink cluster, i.e. whether bind the cluster lifecycle with the job lifecycle. For dedicated clusters (application cluster or dedicated session clusters), the lifecycle of the cluster should be bound with the job lifecycle. But for shared session clusters, the lifecycle of the Flink cluster should be independent of the jobs running in it. As we can see, these three behaviors are sort of independent, the current configurations fail to support all the combination of wanted behaviors. Ideally there should be three separate configurations, for example: - client.attached.after.submission and client.heartbeat.timeout control the behavior on the client side. - jobmanager.cancel-on-attached-client-exit controls the behavior of the job when an attached client lost connection. The client heartbeat timeout and attach-ness will be also passed to the JM upon job submission. - cluster.shutdown-on-first-job-finishes *(*or jobmanager.shutdown-cluster-after-job-finishes) controls the cluster behavior after the job finishes normally / abnormally. This is a cluster level setting instead of a job level setting. Therefore it can only be set when launching the cluster. The current code sort of combines config 2 and 3 into execution.shutdown-on-attach-exit. This assumes the the life cycle of the cluster is the same as the job when the client is attached. This FLIP does not intend to change that. but using the execution.attached config for the client behavior control looks misleading. So this FLIP proposes to replace it with a more intuitive config of client.attached.after.submission. This makes it clear that it is a configuration controlling the client side behavior, instead of the execution of the job. Thanks, Jiangjie (Becket) Qin On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:34 PM Weihua Hu wrote: > Hi Allison > > Thanks for driving this FLIP. It's a valuable feature for batch jobs. > This helps keep "Drop Per-Job Mode [1]" going. > > +1 for this proposal. > > However, it seems that the change in this FLIP is not detailed enough. > I have a few questions. > > 1. The config 'execution.attached' is not only used in per-job mode, > but also in session mode to shutdown the cluster. IMHO, it's better to > keep this option name. > > 2. This FLIP only mentions YARN mode. I believe this feature should > work in both YARN and Kubernetes mode. > > 3. Within the attach mode, we support two features: > execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit > and client.heartbeat.timeout. These should also be taken into account. > > 4. The Application Mode will shut down once the job has been completed. > So, if we use the flink client to poll job status via REST API for attach > mode, > there is a chance that the client will not be able to retrieve the job > finish status. > Perhaps FLINK-24113[3] will help with this. > > > [1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-26000 > [2] > > https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode > [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24113 > > Best, > Weihua > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:47 AM liu ron wrote: > > > Hi, Allison > > > > Thanks for driving this proposal, it looks cool for batch jobs under > > application mode. But after reading your FLIP document and [1], I have a > > question. Why do you want to rename the execution.attached configuration > to > > client.attached.after.submission and at the same time deprecate > > execution.attached? Based on your design, I understand the role of these > > two options are the same. Introducing a new option would increase the > cost > > of understanding and use for the user, so why not follow the idea > discussed > > in FLINK-25495 and make Application mode support attached.execution. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-25495 > > > > Best, > > Ron > > > > Venkatakrishnan Sowrirajan 于2023年8月9日周三 02:07写道： > > > > > This is definitely a useful feature especially for the flink batch > > > execution workloads using flow orchestrators like Airflow, Azkaban, > Oozie > > > etc. Thanks for reviving this issue and starting a FLIP. > > > > > > Regards > > > Venkata krishnan > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 4:09 PM Allison Chang >
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi Allison Thanks for driving this FLIP. It's a valuable feature for batch jobs. This helps keep "Drop Per-Job Mode [1]" going. +1 for this proposal. However, it seems that the change in this FLIP is not detailed enough. I have a few questions. 1. The config 'execution.attached' is not only used in per-job mode, but also in session mode to shutdown the cluster. IMHO, it's better to keep this option name. 2. This FLIP only mentions YARN mode. I believe this feature should work in both YARN and Kubernetes mode. 3. Within the attach mode, we support two features: execution.shutdown-on-attached-exit and client.heartbeat.timeout. These should also be taken into account. 4. The Application Mode will shut down once the job has been completed. So, if we use the flink client to poll job status via REST API for attach mode, there is a chance that the client will not be able to retrieve the job finish status. Perhaps FLINK-24113[3] will help with this. [1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-26000 [2] https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/deployment/resource-providers/native_kubernetes/#session-mode [2]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-24113 Best, Weihua On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 10:47 AM liu ron wrote: > Hi, Allison > > Thanks for driving this proposal, it looks cool for batch jobs under > application mode. But after reading your FLIP document and [1], I have a > question. Why do you want to rename the execution.attached configuration to > client.attached.after.submission and at the same time deprecate > execution.attached? Based on your design, I understand the role of these > two options are the same. Introducing a new option would increase the cost > of understanding and use for the user, so why not follow the idea discussed > in FLINK-25495 and make Application mode support attached.execution. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-25495 > > Best, > Ron > > Venkatakrishnan Sowrirajan 于2023年8月9日周三 02:07写道： > > > This is definitely a useful feature especially for the flink batch > > execution workloads using flow orchestrators like Airflow, Azkaban, Oozie > > etc. Thanks for reviving this issue and starting a FLIP. > > > > Regards > > Venkata krishnan > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 4:09 PM Allison Chang > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I am opening this thread to discuss this proposal to support attached > > > execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs. The link to > the > > > FLIP proposal is here: > > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-323*3A*Support*Attached*Execution*on*Flink*Application*Completion*for*Batch*Jobs__;JSsrKysrKysrKys!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!friFO6bJub5FKSLhPIzA6kv-7uffv-zXlv9ZLMKqj_xMcmZl62HhsgvwDXSCS5hfSeyHZgoAVSFg3fk7ChaAFNKi$ > > > > > > This FLIP proposes adding back attached execution for Application Mode. > > In > > > the past attached execution was supported for the per-job mode, which > > will > > > be deprecated and we want to include this feature back into Application > > > mode. > > > > > > Please reply to this email thread and share your thoughts/opinions. > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > Allison Chang > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi, Allison Thanks for driving this proposal, it looks cool for batch jobs under application mode. But after reading your FLIP document and [1], I have a question. Why do you want to rename the execution.attached configuration to client.attached.after.submission and at the same time deprecate execution.attached? Based on your design, I understand the role of these two options are the same. Introducing a new option would increase the cost of understanding and use for the user, so why not follow the idea discussed in FLINK-25495 and make Application mode support attached.execution. [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-25495 Best, Ron Venkatakrishnan Sowrirajan 于2023年8月9日周三 02:07写道： > This is definitely a useful feature especially for the flink batch > execution workloads using flow orchestrators like Airflow, Azkaban, Oozie > etc. Thanks for reviving this issue and starting a FLIP. > > Regards > Venkata krishnan > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 4:09 PM Allison Chang > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I am opening this thread to discuss this proposal to support attached > > execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs. The link to the > > FLIP proposal is here: > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-323*3A*Support*Attached*Execution*on*Flink*Application*Completion*for*Batch*Jobs__;JSsrKysrKysrKys!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!friFO6bJub5FKSLhPIzA6kv-7uffv-zXlv9ZLMKqj_xMcmZl62HhsgvwDXSCS5hfSeyHZgoAVSFg3fk7ChaAFNKi$ > > > > This FLIP proposes adding back attached execution for Application Mode. > In > > the past attached execution was supported for the per-job mode, which > will > > be deprecated and we want to include this feature back into Application > > mode. > > > > Please reply to this email thread and share your thoughts/opinions. > > > > Thank you! > > > > Allison Chang > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
This is definitely a useful feature especially for the flink batch execution workloads using flow orchestrators like Airflow, Azkaban, Oozie etc. Thanks for reviving this issue and starting a FLIP. Regards Venkata krishnan On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 4:09 PM Allison Chang wrote: > Hi all, > > I am opening this thread to discuss this proposal to support attached > execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs. The link to the > FLIP proposal is here: > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-323*3A*Support*Attached*Execution*on*Flink*Application*Completion*for*Batch*Jobs__;JSsrKysrKysrKys!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!friFO6bJub5FKSLhPIzA6kv-7uffv-zXlv9ZLMKqj_xMcmZl62HhsgvwDXSCS5hfSeyHZgoAVSFg3fk7ChaAFNKi$ > > This FLIP proposes adding back attached execution for Application Mode. In > the past attached execution was supported for the per-job mode, which will > be deprecated and we want to include this feature back into Application > mode. > > Please reply to this email thread and share your thoughts/opinions. > > Thank you! > > Allison Chang >
[DISCUSS] FLIP-323: Support Attached Execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs
Hi all, I am opening this thread to discuss this proposal to support attached execution on Flink Application Completion for Batch Jobs. The link to the FLIP proposal is here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-323%3A+Support+Attached+Execution+on+Flink+Application+Completion+for+Batch+Jobs This FLIP proposes adding back attached execution for Application Mode. In the past attached execution was supported for the per-job mode, which will be deprecated and we want to include this feature back into Application mode. Please reply to this email thread and share your thoughts/opinions. Thank you! Allison Chang
