Hi, Very thanks Dawid for proposing the FLIP to clarify the ownership for the states. +1 for the overall changes since it makes the behavior clear and provide users a determined method to finally cleanup savepoints / retained checkpoints.
Regarding the changes to the public interface, it seems currently the changes are all bound to the savepoint, but from the FLIP it seems perhaps we might also need to support the claim declaration for retained checkpoints like in the cli side[1] ? If so, then might it be better to change the option name from `execution.savepoint.restore-mode` to something like `execution.restore-mode`? Best, Yun [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/ops/state/checkpoints/#resuming-from-a-retained-checkpoint ------------------------------------------------------------------ From:Konstantin Knauf <kna...@apache.org> Send Time:2021 Nov. 19 (Fri.) 16:00 To:dev <dev@flink.apache.org> Subject:Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-193: Snapshots ownership Hi Dawid, Thanks for working on this FLIP. Clarifying the differences and guarantees around savepoints and checkpoints will make it easier and safer for users and downstream projects and platforms to work with them. +1 to the changing the current (undefined) behavior when recovering from retained checkpoints. Users can now choose between claiming and not claiming, which I think will make the current mixed behavior obsolete. Cheers, Konstantin On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 8:19 AM Dawid Wysakowicz <dwysakow...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi devs, > > I'd like to bring up for a discussion a proposal to clean up ownership > of snapshots, both checkpoints and savepoints. > > The goal here is to make it clear who is responsible for deleting > checkpoints/savepoints files and when can that be done in a safe manner. > > Looking forward for your feedback! > > Best, > > Dawid > > [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/bIyqCw > > > -- Konstantin Knauf https://twitter.com/snntrable https://github.com/knaufk
