Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[FLINK-17817] Fix type serializer duplication in CollectSinkFunction #12272

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 21, 2020
Merged

[FLINK-17817] Fix type serializer duplication in CollectSinkFunction #12272

merged 1 commit into from
May 21, 2020

Conversation

tsreaper
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

This is a hot fix for CollectSinkFunction. TypeSerializers are not thread safe but currently CollectSinkFunction reuses them among two threads. This PR fixes this problem.

Actually FLINK-17774 also solves this problem, but we should add a quick fix now to not shade other failures in tests.

Brief change log

  • Fix serializer thread safe problem in CollectSinkFunction

Verifying this change

This change is already covered by existing tests.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
  • The serializers: no
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: no
  • The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? not applicable

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented May 21, 2020

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit ed5e8c9 (Fri Oct 16 10:52:44 UTC 2020)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.


The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

Copy link
Contributor

@JingsongLi JingsongLi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Consider breaking master now, I will merge it after test passing.

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented May 21, 2020

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

@tsreaper
Copy link
Contributor Author

Copy link
Contributor

@JingsongLi JingsongLi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

@JingsongLi JingsongLi merged commit 1cf06e1 into apache:master May 21, 2020
JingsongLi pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants