Hi Xuannan,

Thanks a lot for the update. The FLIP looks good to me. +1 for it.

Regards,
Jeyhun

On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 4:45 AM Xuannan Su <suxuanna...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jeyhun,
>
> Thanks for the comment!
>
> Yes, we intended to remove the StreamPiplineOptions in 2.0. I updated
> the FLIP to include the information.
>
> Best regards,
> Xuannan
>
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 9:16 PM Jeyhun Karimov <je.kari...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Xuannan,
> >
> > Thanks for driving this FLIP!
> > I have a minor comment. Do we plan to remove StreamPipelineOptions in
> 2.0,
> > as it only contains deprecated options?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jeyhun
> >
> > On Sat, May 11, 2024 at 4:40 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Xuannan for the update!
> > >
> > > LGTM, +1 for this proposal.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Rui
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 11, 2024 at 10:20 AM Xuannan Su <suxuanna...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Rui,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the suggestion!
> > > >
> > > > I updated the description of
> > > > taskmanager.network.memory.max-overdraft-buffers-per-gate and
> > > > hard-coded it to 20.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Xuannan
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 11:28 AM Rui Fan <1996fan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Xuannan for driving this proposal!
> > > > >
> > > > > > taskmanager.network.memory.max-overdraft-buffers-per-gate will be
> > > > removed
> > > > > and hard-coded to either 10 or 20.
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently, it's a public option. Could we determine the value of
> > > > > the overdraft buffer in the current FLIP?
> > > > >
> > > > > I vote 20 as the hard code value due to 2 reasons:
> > > > > - Removing this option means users cannot change it, it might be
> better
> > > > to
> > > > > turn it up.
> > > > > - Most of tasks don't use the overdraft buffer, so increasing it
> > > doesn't
> > > > > introduce more risk.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Rui
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, May 6, 2024 at 10:47 AM Yuxin Tan <tanyuxinw...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the effort, Xuannan.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for the proposal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Yuxin
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Xintong Song <tonysong...@gmail.com> 于2024年4月29日周一 15:40写道:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for driving this effort, Xuannan.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 for the proposed changes.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just one suggestion: Some of the proposed changes involve not
> > > solely
> > > > > > > changing the configuration options, but are bound to changing /
> > > > removal
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > certain features. E.g., the removal of hash-blocking shuffle
> and
> > > > legacy
> > > > > > > hybrid shuffle mode, and the behavior change of overdraft
> network
> > > > > > buffers.
> > > > > > > Therefore, it might be nicer to provide an implementation plan
> > > with a
> > > > > > list
> > > > > > > of related tasks in the FLIP. This should not block the FLIP
> > > though.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Xintong
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 4:35 PM Xuannan Su <
> suxuanna...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'd like to start a discussion on FLIP-450: Improve Runtime
> > > > > > > > Configuration for Flink 2.0 [1]. As Flink moves toward 2.0,
> we
> > > have
> > > > > > > > revisited all runtime configurations and identified several
> > > > > > > > improvements to enhance user-friendliness and
> maintainability. In
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > FLIP, we aim to refine the runtime configuration.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Looking forward to everyone's feedback and suggestions. Thank
> > > you!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > > Xuannan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-450%3A+Improve+Runtime+Configuration+for+Flink+2.0
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Reply via email to