SEZ9 commented on issue #12339: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/issues/12339#issuecomment-5787887857
@Vivek1106-04 thanks for the detailed update. Your comment appears to have been cut off after "Your comment here keeps the" — could you post the rest of the question so I can answer it directly? On the three items: the changes you describe (stating the ~3 µs hop cost with the crossover, marking the dispatcher-contract change as an explicit Correction, and moving the saturation figures into the residual-cost paragraph) sound like the right direction. I have not yet reviewed the updated STIP text or the change at `da0cbbf52`, so I'll confirm once I've read them rather than sign off on the description alone. On the gate, my position from this thread is unchanged: before #12165 is accepted, the dispatcher contract needs to be explicit and proven, and the regression that fills the dispatch capacity with savepoint-contended coordinators and shows an unrelated pipeline still receives its trigger/watchdog work is part of that proof. If the `startSavepoint` lock-holding is going to be tracked as a follow-up, please link that follow-up from the STIP's Correction section and state clearly in the test plan where the regression lands, so I can evaluate whether the split is acceptable. Scheduling-delay observability stays ahead of any thread-count or tuning option. Once I see the rest of your question and the updated text, I'll close out anything I've missed. <!-- streview-comment:1244 --> -- 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]
