Hi, I can help to create a FLIP page, from the gdoc, but one thing that I noteced is under "Session mode" both the text and the code snippets refer to "FlinkDeployment". I believe that should be "FlinkSessionJob".
Best, Ferenc On Wednesday, November 6th, 2024 at 17:33, David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > > Hi lajith, > Yes I like the simplicity of the current proposal. > > Hi Gyula, > The next stage is to assign a Flip number and move the content of the google > doc into the flip wiki. Unfortunately, as we are not committers, we are not > authorized to do either of these activities. Are you able to copy this over > or get another committer to do this please; so we can get this moving. > > Kind regards, David. > > From: Lajith Koova lajith...@gmail.com > > Date: Monday, 14 October 2024 at 08:52 > To: dev@flink.apache.org dev@flink.apache.org > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Add K8S conditions to Flink CRD > Thank you all for the valuable feedback . > > > Following the procedure outlined on the Flink Improvement Proposal > > Confluence page [1], we kindly ask the PMC/Committers to transfer the > > content from the Add K8S conditions to CRD's Status [2] and assign a > > FLIP Number for us, which we will use for voting. > > > [1] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/Flink+Improvement+Proposals#FlinkImprovementProposals-Process > > [2] > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/12wlJCL_Vq2KZnABzK7OR7gAd1jZMmo0MxgXQXqtWODs/edit?tab=t.0 > > > Thanks > > Lajith > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 11:54 PM Gyula Fóra gyula.f...@gmail.com wrote: > > > Hey! > > > > I think the proposal is now simple enough : > > - Running condition for Applications / SessionJobs > > - Ready condition for Session clusters > > > > I think we should formalize this into a Flip page and start the vote on > > this from my side. > > The next step to consider is having an independent condition that captures > > the upgrade process itself (if a resource is fully upgraded / reconciled) > > > > Cheers, > > Gyula > > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 12:16 PM David Radley david_rad...@uk.ibm.com > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Lajith, > > > The updated document is much more detailed and looks good. As you say the > > > only situation that is not handled currently is when there are multiple > > > Flink jobs running in Application Mode. > > > > > > As discussed , you are looking to test this situation so we know how it > > > will perform. > > > > > > When you say “During transition of Job state, there will be only one > > > condition for the > > > Flink Deployment in application mode.”. I am not sure I understand. > > > > > > * I thought we have 1 condition per Flink job state, so I assume we > > > have one true condition and potentially other historical false ones. > > > * When you say during transition, are you thinking of some small time > > > window between states. I am not sure what you are saying here. > > > > > > Kind regards , David > > > > > > From: Lajith Koova lajith...@gmail.com > > > Date: Wednesday, 11 September 2024 at 03:01 > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org dev@flink.apache.org > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Add K8S conditions to Flink > > > CRD > > > Hi, > > > > > > Here is the updated Proposal doc > > > < > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/12wlJCL_Vq2KZnABzK7OR7gAd1jZMmo0MxgXQXqtWODs/edit#heading=h.cz8x5nsncuwb > > > > > . > > > > > > *Summary : * > > > > > > Session Mode: > > > > > > Status conditions will be populated with status of Job manager. > > > > > > Application Mode: > > > > > > 1. In application mode , status conditions will be populated with status > > > of > > > Job running in the cluster. > > > > > > 2. Each Flink Job state will have one condition associated with. > > > > > > 3. During transition of Job state, there will be only one condition for > > > the > > > Flink Deployment in application mode. > > > > > > 4. If there are multiple Jobs in application, how to handle them in > > > populating the condition status?. does condition status should contain > > > information about multiple jobs?. > > > > > > Please let me know your inputs and suggestions. > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > Lajith > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 10:25 AM Lajith Koova lajith...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thank you Gyula for the feedback. > > > > > > > > From the above proposed conditions, so will be having two conditions > > > > as > > > > below > > > > > > > > status: > > > > conditions: > > > > - type: JobReady > > > > message: The Job is running > > > > reason: running > > > > status: 'True' > > > > lastTransitionTime: '' > > > > - type: ReconciliationSucceed > > > > message: The resource deployment is considered to be stable and won’t > > > > be > > > > rolled back > > > > reason: stable > > > > status: 'True' > > > > lastTransitionTime: '' > > > > > > > > Condition JobReady is derived from JobStatus and Condition > > > > ReconciliationSucceed > > > > derived from LifecycleState. > > > > > > > > Please correct me if I missed anything. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Lajith K > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 2:23 PM Gyula Fóra gyula.f...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > David, > > > > > > > > > > The problem is exactly that ResourceLifecycleStates do not correspond > > > > > to > > > > > specific Job statuses (JobReady condition) in most cases. Let me give > > > > > you > > > > > a > > > > > concrete example: > > > > > > > > > > ResourceLifecycleState.STABLE means that app/job defined in the spec > > > > > has > > > > > been successfully deployed and was observed running, and this spec is > > > > > now > > > > > considered to be stable (won't be rolled back). Once a resource > > > > > (FlinkDeployment) reached STABLE state, it won't change unless the > > > > > user > > > > > changes the spec. At the same time, this doesn't really say anything > > > > > about > > > > > job health/readiness at any given future time. 10 minutes later the > > > > > job > > > > > can > > > > > go in an unrecoverable failure loop and never reach a running status, > > > > > the > > > > > ResourceLifecycleState will remain STABLE. > > > > > > > > > > This is actually not a problem with the ResourceLifecycleState but > > > > > more > > > > > with the understanding of it. It's called ResourceLifecycleState and > > > > > not > > > > > JobState exactly because it refers to the upgrade/rollback/suspend etc > > > > > lifecycle of the FlinkDeployment/FlinkSessionJob resource and not the > > > > > underlying flink job itself. > > > > > > > > > > But this is a crucial detail here that we need to consider otherwise > > > > > the > > > > > "Ready" condition that we may create will be practically useless. > > > > > > > > > > This is the reason why @morh...@apache.org morh...@apache.org and > > > > > I suggest separating this to at least 2 independent conditions. One > > > > > could > > > > > be the UpgradeCompleted/ReconciliationCompleted or something along > > > > > these > > > > > lines computed based on LifecycleState (as described in your proposal > > > > > but > > > > > with a different name). The other should be JobReady which could > > > > > initially > > > > > work based on the JobStatus.state field but ideally would be user > > > > > configurable ready condition such as (job running at least 10 minutes, > > > > > running and have taken checkpoints etcetc). > > > > > > > > > > These 2 conditions should be enough to start with and would actually > > > > > provide a tangible value to users. We can probably leave out > > > > > ClusterReady > > > > > on a second thought. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 5:16 PM David Radley <david_rad...@uk.ibm.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Gyula, > > > > > > Thank you for the quick response and confirmation we need a Flip. I > > > > > > am > > > > > > not > > > > > > an expert at K8s, Lajith will answer in more detail. Some questions > > > > > > I > > > > > > had > > > > > > anyway: > > > > > > > > > > > > I assume each of the ResourceLifecycleState do have a corresponding > > > > > > jobReady status. You point out some mistakes in the table, for > > > > > > example > > > > > > that > > > > > > STABLE should be NotReady; thankyou. If we put a reason mentioning > > > > > > the > > > > > > stable state, this would help us understand the jobStatus. > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess the jobReady is one perspective that we know is useful (with > > > > > > corrected mappings from ResourceLifecycleState and with reasons). > > > > > > Can I > > > > > > check that the 2 proposed conditions would also be useful > > > > > > additions? > > > > > > I > > > > > > assume that in your proposal when jobReady is true, then > > > > > > UpgradeCompleted > > > > > > condition would not be present and ClusterReady would always be > > > > > > true? > > > > > > I > > > > > > know conditions do not need to be orthogonal, but I wanted to check > > > > > > what > > > > > > your thoughts are. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Gyula Fóra gyula.f...@gmail.com > > > > > > Date: Wednesday, 29 May 2024 at 15:28 > > > > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org dev@flink.apache.org > > > > > > Cc: morh...@apache.org morh...@apache.org > > > > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Add K8S conditions to > > > > > > Flink > > > > > > CRD > > > > > > Hi David! > > > > > > > > > > > > This change definitely warrants a FLIP even if the code change is > > > > > > not > > > > > > huge, > > > > > > there are quite some implications going forward. > > > > > > > > > > > > Looping in @morh...@apache.org morh...@apache.org for this > > > > > > discussion. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have some questions / suggestions regarding the condition's > > > > > > meaning > > > > > > and > > > > > > naming. > > > > > > > > > > > > In your proposal you have: > > > > > > - Ready (True/False) -> This condition is intended for resources > > > > > > which > > > > > > are > > > > > > fully ready and operational > > > > > > - Error (True) -> This condition can be used in scenarios where any > > > > > > exception/error during resource reconcile process > > > > > > > > > > > > The problem with the above is that the implementation does not well > > > > > > reflect > > > > > > this. ResourceLifecycleState STABLE/ROLLED_BACK does not actually > > > > > > mean > > > > > > the > > > > > > job is running, it just means that the resource is fully reconciled > > > > > > and > > > > > > it > > > > > > will not be rolled back (so the current pending upgrade is > > > > > > completed). > > > > > > This > > > > > > is mainly a fault of the ResourceLifecycleState as it doesn't > > > > > > capture > > > > > > the > > > > > > job status but one could argue that it was "designed" this way. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we should probably have more condition types to capture the > > > > > > difference: > > > > > > - JobReady (True/False) -> Flink job is running (Basically job > > > > > > status > > > > > > but > > > > > > with transition time) > > > > > > - ClusterReady (True/False) -> Session / Application cluster is > > > > > > deployed > > > > > > (Basically JM deployment status but with transition time) > > > > > > - UpgradeCompleted (True/False) -> Similar to what you call Ready > > > > > > now > > > > > > which should correspond to the STABLE/ROLLED_BACK states and mostly > > > > > > tracks > > > > > > in-progress CR updates > > > > > > > > > > > > This is my best idea at the moment, not great as it feels a little > > > > > > redundant with the current status fields. But maybe thats not a > > > > > > problem > > > > > > or > > > > > > a way to eliminate the old fields later? > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure of the Error status and what this means in > > > > > > practice. > > > > > > Why > > > > > > do we want to track the last error in 2 places? It's already in the > > > > > > status. > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Gyula > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 3:55 PM David Radley < > > > > > > david_rad...@uk.ibm.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > Thanks Lajith for raising this discussion thread under the Flip > > > > > > > title. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To summarise the concerns from the other discussion thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > “ > > > > > > > - I echo Gyula that including some examples and further > > > > > > > explanations > > > > > > > might > > > > > > > ease reader's work. With the current version, the FLIP is a bit > > > > > > > hard > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > follow. - Will the usage of Conditions be enabled by default? Or > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > be any disadvantages for Flink users? If Conditions with the same > > > > > > > type > > > > > > > already exist in the Status Conditions > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Do you think we should have clear rules about handling rules for > > > > > > > how > > > > > > > these Conditions should be managed, especially when multiple > > > > > > > Conditions > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the same type are present? For example, resource has multiple > > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > the same condition (e.g., Error due to network and Error due to > > > > > > > I/O). > > > > > > > Then, > > > > > > > overriding the old condition with the new one is not the best > > > > > > > approach > > > > > > > no? > > > > > > > Please correct me if I misunderstood. > > > > > > > “ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I see the Google doc link has been reformatted to match the Flip > > > > > > > template. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To explicitly answer the questions from Jeyhun and Gyula: > > > > > > > - “Will the usage of Conditions be enabled by default?” Yes, but > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > just making the status content useful, whereas before it was not > > > > > > > useful. > > > > > > > - in terms of examples, I am not sure what you would like to see, > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > table Lajith provided shows the status for various > > > > > > > ResourceLifecycleStates. > > > > > > > How the operator gets into these states is the current behaviour. > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > change just shows the appropriate corresponding high level status > > > > > > > – > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > could be shown on the User Interfaces. > > > > > > > - “will there be any disadvantages for Flink users?” None , there > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > just > > > > > > > more information in the status, without this it is more difficult > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > out the status of the job. > > > > > > > - Multiple conditions question. The status is showing whether the > > > > > > > job > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > ready or not, so as long as the last condition is the one that is > > > > > > > shown - > > > > > > > all is as expected. I don’t think this needs rules for precedence > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > like. > > > > > > > - The condition’s Reason is going to be more specific. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gyula and Jeyhun, is the google doc clear enough for you now? Do > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > feel > > > > > > > you feedback has been addressed? Lajith and I are happy to provide > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > details. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I wonder whether this change is big enough to warrant a Flip, as > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > is so > > > > > > > small. We could do this in an issue. WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, David. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Lajith Koova lajith...@gmail.com > > > > > > > Date: Wednesday, 29 May 2024 at 13:41 > > > > > > > To: dev@flink.apache.org dev@flink.apache.org > > > > > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX Add K8S conditions to Flink > > > > > > > CRD > > > > > > > Hello , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Discussion thread here: > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/dvy8w17pyjv68c3t962w49frl9odoz4z > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > discuss a proposal to add Conditions field in the CR status of > > > > > > > Flink > > > > > > > Deployment and FlinkSessionJob. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Note : Starting this new thread as discussion thread title has > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > modified to follow the FLIP process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > 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 > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN
