We discussed in the PR that it's actually a feature, but thanks Yang for bringing it up and improving the docs around this piece of code!
-Max On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 10:06 PM Yang LI <yang.hunter...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Rui, > > Here is the jira ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-33966, I > have pushed a tiny pr for this ticket. > > Regards, > Yang > > On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 at 16:15, Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Thanks Yang for reporting this issue! >> >> You are right, these 2 conditions are indeed the same. It's unexpected IIUC. >> Would you like to fix it? >> >> Feel free to create a FLINK JIRA to fix it if you would like to, and I'm >> happy to >> review! >> >> And cc @Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >> >> Best, >> Rui >> >> On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 11:03 PM Yang LI <yang.hunter...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hello, >> > >> > I see we have 2 times the same condition check in the >> > function getNumRecordsInPerSecond (L220 >> > < >> > https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/blob/main/flink-autoscaler/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/autoscaler/metrics/ScalingMetrics.java#L220 >> > > >> > and >> > L224 >> > < >> > https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/blob/main/flink-autoscaler/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/autoscaler/metrics/ScalingMetrics.java#L224 >> > >). >> > I imagine you want to use SOURCE_TASK_NUM_RECORDS_OUT_PER_SEC when the >> > operator is not the source. Can you confirm this and if we have a FIP >> > ticket to fix this? >> > >> > Regards, >> > Yang LI >> >
