Thanks for the vote, @Jincheng.
Concerning the namings, the original idea was, as you suggested, to have separate configuration names for batch and rocksdb while only one of them will take effect at a time. It was then in the discussion thread [1] that @Stepahn suggested to combine these two. > We never have batch algos and RocksDB mixed, having this as separate > options is confusing as it suggests this can be combined arbitrarily. I > also think that a slim possibility that we may ever combine this in the > future is not enough reason to make it more complex/confusing. > This suggestion was also supported by others in the discussion thread. That's why we are trying to come up with a name that covers both batch and rocksdb memory consumers. Thank you~ Xintong Song [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-FLIP-141-Intra-Slot-Managed-Memory-Sharing-tp44146p44253.html On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:37 PM jincheng sun <sunjincheng...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for the proposal! > > Regarding the name of `BATCH_OP/ROCKSDB`, we can reserve the configuration > names for batch and rocksdb respectively, ` batch_ OP` for batch, "ROCKSDB" > for roockdb. and the default value as follows: > > { > BATCH_OP: 70, > ROCKSDB : 70, > PYTHON : 30 > } > > Only one of `BATCH_ OP` and `ROCKSDB` will work. What do you think? > > Best, > Jincheng > > > Xintong Song <tonysong...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月7日周一 下午1:46写道： > > > Thanks for the votes. > > > > Concerning the name for batch/RocksDB memory consumer, how about > "execution > > memory"? > > We can further explain in docs and config option description that this is > > used for job execution, which is currently dedicated to rocksdb in > > streaming and batch algorithms in batch. > > > > Thank you~ > > > > Xintong Song > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 11:43 AM Yangze Guo <karma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Best, > > > Yangze Guo > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 10:54 AM Zhu Zhu <reed...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Zhu > > > > > > > > Dian Fu <dian0511...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月7日周一 上午10:34写道： > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > 在 2020年9月3日，下午8:46，Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> 写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Xintong, > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for starting the vote. > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for the proposal given that we find a proper name for the > > > > > > different memory consumers (specifically the batch/RocksDB > > consumer) > > > and > > > > > > their corresponding weights. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Till > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:43 PM Xintong Song < > > tonysong...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hi devs, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I'd like to start a voting thread on FLIP-141[1], which proposes > > how > > > > > >> managed memory should be shared by various use cases within a > > slot. > > > The > > > > > >> proposal has been discussed in [2]. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> The vote will be open for at least 72h + weekends. I'll try to > > > close it > > > > > on > > > > > >> September 8, unless there is an objection or not enough votes. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Thank you~ > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Xintong Song > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [1] > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-141%3A+Intra-Slot+Managed+Memory+Sharing#FLIP141:IntraSlotManagedMemorySharing-compatibility > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [2] > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-FLIP-141-Intra-Slot-Managed-Memory-Sharing-td44146.html > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
