Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Hi Dylan, Unfortunately stop with savepoint is not supported with StateFun. We will bump the priority of this issue and try to address it in the next bugfix release. Thanks, Igal. On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 9:08 PM Meissner, Dylan < dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> wrote: > Thank you for this information, Piotr. > > The comment from Igal Shilman in FLINK-18894 issue says, "Obtaining a > MAX_PRIO mailbox from StreamTask, solves this issue." I'm unclear what this > means -- is this a workaround I can leverage? > > Dylan > -- > *From:* Piotr Nowojski > *Sent:* Thursday, March 4, 2021 7:03 AM > *To:* Kezhu Wang > *Cc:* Meissner, Dylan ; > user@flink.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint > > It doesn't change much ;) There is a known issue of stopping with > savepoint and stateful functions not working [1]. The difference is that > this one we will probably want to tackle sooner or later. Old streaming > iterations are probably dead.. > > Piotrek > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-18894 > > czw., 4 mar 2021 o 15:56 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > > Hi all, > > My BAD!!! > > Sorry for apparent mess up in that moment. > > I will write a separate test for stream iterations. > > > The stateful function part should be a separated issue. > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > > On March 4, 2021 at 22:13:48, Piotr Nowojski (piotr.nowoj...@gmail.com) > wrote: > > Hi Meissner, > > Can you clarify, are you talking about stateful functions? [1] Or the > stream iterations [2]? The first e-mail suggests stateful functions, but > the ticket that Kezhu created is talking about the latter. > > Piotrek > > [1] https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/07/release-statefun-2.0.0.html > [2] > https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/datastream_api.html#iterations > > > > niedz., 28 lut 2021 o 15:33 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > > Hi, > > You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in > deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there > will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two > phase commit operators in your job. > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > > On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. > > I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking > two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. > -- > *From:* Kezhu Wang > *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM > *To:* user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan < > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> > *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint > > Hi, > > Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created > FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. > > > FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented > as this pseudo-code: > > val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props > required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) > return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, > props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) > > Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. > > However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain > ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit > the "failure-cause: > org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired > before completing" CompletedException. > > In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed > their work: > > Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 > (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB > feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% > | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a > feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | > data-size: 0 B > > I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts? > >
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Thank you for this information, Piotr. The comment from Igal Shilman in FLINK-18894 issue says, "Obtaining a MAX_PRIO mailbox from StreamTask, solves this issue." I'm unclear what this means -- is this a workaround I can leverage? Dylan From: Piotr Nowojski Sent: Thursday, March 4, 2021 7:03 AM To: Kezhu Wang Cc: Meissner, Dylan ; user@flink.apache.org Subject: Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint It doesn't change much ;) There is a known issue of stopping with savepoint and stateful functions not working [1]. The difference is that this one we will probably want to tackle sooner or later. Old streaming iterations are probably dead.. Piotrek [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-18894 czw., 4 mar 2021 o 15:56 Kezhu Wang mailto:kez...@gmail.com>> napisał(a): Hi all, My BAD!!! Sorry for apparent mess up in that moment. I will write a separate test for stream iterations. The stateful function part should be a separated issue. Best, Kezhu Wang On March 4, 2021 at 22:13:48, Piotr Nowojski (piotr.nowoj...@gmail.com<mailto:piotr.nowoj...@gmail.com>) wrote: Hi Meissner, Can you clarify, are you talking about stateful functions? [1] Or the stream iterations [2]? The first e-mail suggests stateful functions, but the ticket that Kezhu created is talking about the latter. Piotrek [1] https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/07/release-statefun-2.0.0.html [2] https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/datastream_api.html#iterations niedz., 28 lut 2021 o 15:33 Kezhu Wang mailto:kez...@gmail.com>> napisał(a): Hi, You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two phase commit operators in your job. Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan (dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com<mailto:dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com>) wrote: Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. From: Kezhu Wang mailto:kez...@gmail.com>> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM To: user@flink.apache.org<mailto:user@flink.apache.org> mailto:user@flink.apache.org>>; Meissner, Dylan mailto:dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com>> Subject: Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint Hi, Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan (dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com<mailto:dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com>) wrote: I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented as this pseudo-code: val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit the "failure-cause: org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired before completing" CompletedException. In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed their work: Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | data-size: 0 B I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts?
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
It doesn't change much ;) There is a known issue of stopping with savepoint and stateful functions not working [1]. The difference is that this one we will probably want to tackle sooner or later. Old streaming iterations are probably dead.. Piotrek [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-18894 czw., 4 mar 2021 o 15:56 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > Hi all, > > My BAD!!! > > Sorry for apparent mess up in that moment. > > I will write a separate test for stream iterations. > > > The stateful function part should be a separated issue. > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > > On March 4, 2021 at 22:13:48, Piotr Nowojski (piotr.nowoj...@gmail.com) > wrote: > > Hi Meissner, > > Can you clarify, are you talking about stateful functions? [1] Or the > stream iterations [2]? The first e-mail suggests stateful functions, but > the ticket that Kezhu created is talking about the latter. > > Piotrek > > [1] https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/07/release-statefun-2.0.0.html > [2] > https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/datastream_api.html#iterations > > > > niedz., 28 lut 2021 o 15:33 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > >> Hi, >> >> You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in >> deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there >> will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two >> phase commit operators in your job. >> >> >> Best, >> Kezhu Wang >> >> >> On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan ( >> dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: >> >> Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. >> >> I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by >> taking two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. >> ------ >> *From:* Kezhu Wang >> *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM >> *To:* user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan < >> dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> >> *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created >> FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. >> >> >> FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 >> >> >> Best, >> Kezhu Wang >> >> On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( >> dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: >> >> I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented >> as this pseudo-code: >> >> val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props >> required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) >> return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, >> FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) >> >> Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. >> >> However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain >> ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit >> the "failure-cause: >> org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired >> before completing" CompletedException. >> >> In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed >> their work: >> >> Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 >> (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB >> feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 >> 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a >> feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | >> data-size: 0 B >> >> I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts? >> >>
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Hi all, My BAD!!! Sorry for apparent mess up in that moment. I will write a separate test for stream iterations. The stateful function part should be a separated issue. Best, Kezhu Wang On March 4, 2021 at 22:13:48, Piotr Nowojski (piotr.nowoj...@gmail.com) wrote: Hi Meissner, Can you clarify, are you talking about stateful functions? [1] Or the stream iterations [2]? The first e-mail suggests stateful functions, but the ticket that Kezhu created is talking about the latter. Piotrek [1] https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/07/release-statefun-2.0.0.html [2] https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/datastream_api.html#iterations niedz., 28 lut 2021 o 15:33 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > Hi, > > You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in > deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there > will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two > phase commit operators in your job. > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > > On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. > > I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking > two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. > -- > *From:* Kezhu Wang > *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM > *To:* user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan < > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> > *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint > > Hi, > > Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created > FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. > > > FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented > as this pseudo-code: > > val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props > required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) > return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, > props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) > > Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. > > However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain > ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit > the "failure-cause: > org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired > before completing" CompletedException. > > In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed > their work: > > Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 > (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB > feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% > | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a > feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | > data-size: 0 B > > I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts? > >
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Hi Meissner, Can you clarify, are you talking about stateful functions? [1] Or the stream iterations [2]? The first e-mail suggests stateful functions, but the ticket that Kezhu created is talking about the latter. Piotrek [1] https://flink.apache.org/news/2020/04/07/release-statefun-2.0.0.html [2] https://ci.apache.org/projects/flink/flink-docs-stable/dev/datastream_api.html#iterations niedz., 28 lut 2021 o 15:33 Kezhu Wang napisał(a): > Hi, > > You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in > deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there > will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two > phase commit operators in your job. > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > > On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. > > I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking > two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. > -- > *From:* Kezhu Wang > *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM > *To:* user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan < > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> > *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint > > Hi, > > Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created > FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. > > > FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 > > > Best, > Kezhu Wang > > On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( > dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: > > I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented > as this pseudo-code: > > val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props > required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) > return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, > props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) > > Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. > > However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain > ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit > the "failure-cause: > org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired > before completing" CompletedException. > > In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed > their work: > > Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 > (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB > feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% > | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a > feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | > data-size: 0 B > > I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts? > >
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Hi, You could also try `cancel —withSavepoint [savepointDir]` even it is in deprecation. Comparing to take-savepoints and then cancel approach, there will be no checkpoints in between. This may be important if there are two phase commit operators in your job. Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 20:50:29, Meissner, Dylan ( dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. -- *From:* Kezhu Wang *Sent:* Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM *To:* user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan < dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com> *Subject:* Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint Hi, Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented as this pseudo-code: val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit the "failure-cause: org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired before completing" CompletedException. In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed their work: Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | data-size: 0 B I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts?
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Thank you for opening the bug and including the extra context. I'll track the progress and, in the meantime, I will work around by taking two separate actions when stopping job: take-savepoints, then cancel. From: Kezhu Wang Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2021 12:31 AM To: user@flink.apache.org ; Meissner, Dylan Subject: Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint Hi, Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan (dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com<mailto:dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com>) wrote: I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented as this pseudo-code: val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit the "failure-cause: org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired before completing" CompletedException. In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed their work: Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | data-size: 0 B I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts?
Re: Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
Hi, Thanks for reporting. I think it is a Flink bug and have created FLINK-21522 for it. You could track progress there. FLINK-21522: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21522 Best, Kezhu Wang On February 28, 2021 at 00:59:04, Meissner, Dylan ( dylan.t.meiss...@nordstrom.com) wrote: I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented as this pseudo-code: val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit the "failure-cause: org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired before completing" CompletedException. In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed their work: Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | data-size: 0 B I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts?
Stateful functions 2.2 and stop with savepoint
I have an embedded function with a SinkFunction as an egress, implemented as this pseudo-code: val serializationSchema = KafkaSchemaSerializationSchema(... props required to use a Confluent Schema Registry with Avro, auth etc ...) return SinkFunctionSpec(EGRESS_ID, FlinkKafkaProducer(serializationSchema, props, AT_LEAST_ONCE)) Checkpointing and taking a savepoint without stopping work as expected. However, when I run "flink stop " or even "flink stop --drain ", the operation never completes, reporting IN_PROGRESS until I hit the "failure-cause: org.apache.flink.runtime.checkpoint.CheckpointException: Checkpoint expired before completing" CompletedException. In the "Checkpoint History" it shows only 2 of my 3 operators completed their work: Source: my-ingress-ingress -> router (my-ingress) | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 638ms | data-size 1.38 KB feedback-union -> functions -> Sink: my-egress-egress | acknowledge 0/1 0% | end-to-end duration: n/a | data-size: n/a feedback | acknowledge: 1/1 (100%) | end-to-end duration: 626ms | data-size: 0 B I've been unable to gain any insights from logs so far. Thoughts?
