Hi,
I wonder if the way that the async request fails could be a retriable or
non-retriable error, so it would retry only for retriable (transient) errors
(like IOExceptions) . I see some talk on the internet around retriable SQL
errors.
If this was the case then we may need configuration to limit the number of
retries of retriable errors.
Kind regards, David
From: Muhammet Orazov <mor+fl...@morazow.com.INVALID>
Date: Monday, 13 May 2024 at 10:30
To: dev@flink.apache.org <dev@flink.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-451: Refactor Async sink API
Great, thanks for clarifying!
Best,
Muhammet
On 2024-05-06 13:40, Ahmed Hamdy wrote:
> Hi Muhammet,
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
>> Could you please add more here why it is harder? Would the
>> `completeExceptionally`
>> method be related to it? Maybe you can add usage example for it also.
>>
>
> this is mainly due to the current implementation of fatal exception
> failures which depends on base `getFatalExceptionConsumer` method that
> is
> decoupled from the actual called method `submitRequestEntries`, Since
> this
> is now not the primary concern of the FLIP, I have removed it from the
> motivation so that the scope is defined around introducing the timeout
> configuration.
>
>> Should we add a list of possible connectors that this FLIP would
>> improve?
>
> Good call, I have added under migration plan.
>
> Best Regards
> Ahmed Hamdy
>
>
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 08:49, Muhammet Orazov <mor+fl...@morazow.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Ahmed,
>>
>> Thanks for the FLIP! +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> > Additionally the current interface for passing fatal exceptions and
>> > retrying records relies on java consumers which makes it harder to
>> > understand.
>>
>> Could you please add more here why it is harder? Would the
>> `completeExceptionally`
>> method be related to it? Maybe you can add usage example for it also.
>>
>> > we should proceed by adding support in all supporting connector repos.
>>
>> Should we add list of possible connectors that this FLIP would
>> improve?
>>
>> Best,
>> Muhammet
>>
>>
>> On 2024-04-29 14:08, Ahmed Hamdy wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> > I would like to start a discussion on FLIP-451[1]
>> > The proposal comes on encountering a couple of issues while working
>> > with
>> > implementers for Async Sink.
>> > The FLIP mainly proposes a new API similar to AsyncFunction and
>> > ResultFuture as well as introducing timeout handling for AsyncSink
>> > requests.
>> > The FLIP targets 1.20 with backward compatible changes and we should
>> > proceed by adding support in all supporting connector repos.
>> >
>> > 1-
>> >
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP-451%3A+Refactor+Async+Sink+API
>> > Best Regards
>> > Ahmed Hamdy
>>
Unless otherwise stated above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited
Registered in England and Wales with number 741598
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hants. PO6 3AU
