Hi Yuepeng,

Looks like this work can have some symbiosis with the change that I've
proposed here in FLIP-505. This addresses the question that Ryan asked
about whether or not remotely stored job archives will be impacted if the
retention is changed. Feel free to take a look at the FLIP as well as the
PR for FLIP-505. Looks like we have the opportunity to significantly
improve the History server with these two changes.

FLIP-505:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLINK/FLIP+505%3A+Flink+History+Server+Scability+Improvements%2C+Remote+Data+Store+Fetch+and+Per+Job+Fetch
PR: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26878

Best,
Allison


On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 9:51 AM Yuepeng Pan <panyuep...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi, Ryan van Huuksloot.
>
> > Might be worth stating that explicitly in the FLIP.
> Nice idea~ The sub-section added here[1] to clarify the item.
>
> Thanks a lot !
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=332499857#FLIP490:EnhancedJobHistoryRetentionPoliciesforHistoryServer
> ​-Thetimingtocheckwhethertargetfileshaveexceededtheretentionthresholds
>
> Best,
> Yuepeng Pan
>
> On 2025/08/14 16:27:39 Ryan van Huuksloot wrote:
> > That sounds like a good option.
> >
> > Might be worth stating that explicitly in the FLIP.
> >
> > No other questions from me - will be a nice extension!
> >
> > Ryan van Huuksloot
> > Staff Engineer, Infrastructure | Streaming Platform
> > [image: Shopify]
> > <https://www.shopify.com/?utm_medium=salessignatures&utm_source=hs_email
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 12:22 PM Yuepeng Pan <panyuep...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi, Hi, Ryan van Huuksloot.
> > >
> > > >Are you planning on having a thread to check for TTL? Or what is the
> plan
> > > >for TTL?
> > > >The quantity based would have a check when a new job is archived?
> > >
> > > Just like the implementation in the POC[1], if we continue following
> the
> > > process where
> > > HistoryServer#start method periodically invokes
> > > HistoryServerArchiveFetcher#fetchArchives
> > > based on 'historyserver.archive.fs.refresh-interval' to check
> > > whether target files should be retained, what do you think about it ?
> > > Of course, I'm very open to hearing about other potentially better
> > > implementation approaches.
> > > Please let me know what's your opinion.
> > > Thank you.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/26902
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Yuepeng Pan
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2025/08/14 16:07:10 Ryan van Huuksloot wrote:
> > > > Thanks, sounds good.
> > > >
> > > > Are you planning on having a thread to check for TTL? Or what is the
> plan
> > > > for TTL?
> > > > The quantity based would have a check when a new job is archived?
> > > >
> > > > Ryan van Huuksloot
> > > > Staff Engineer, Infrastructure | Streaming Platform
> > > > [image: Shopify]
> > > > <
> https://www.shopify.com/?utm_medium=salessignatures&utm_source=hs_email
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 12:04 PM Yuepeng Pan <panyuep...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi, Ryan van Huuksloot.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you very much for your reply. > Question: Is the History
> Server
> > > then
> > > > > going to delete the files stored? > (i.e. we use GCS, would it
> delete
> > > the
> > > > > files there as well?) > Or is this strictly what is shown in the
> UI?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, this feature introduced in the FLIP is a super-set of the
> original
> > > > > feature that is controlled by
> 'historyserver.archive.retained-jobs'.
> > > > >
> > > > > So if I understand correctly, after the new feature is introduced,
> it
> > > > > would affect the retention period of remote distributed storage
> jobs
> > > > > history files as well, not only for what is shown in the UI.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Yuepeng Pan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > At 2025-08-14 23:34:54, "Ryan van Huuksloot"
> > > > > <ryan.vanhuuksl...@shopify.com.INVALID> wrote:
> > > > > >I took a look. Overall it would be nice to have more ways to
> > > configure the
> > > > > >History Server.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Question: Is the History Server then going to delete the files
> stored?
> > > > > >(i.e. we use GCS, would it delete the files there as well?)
> > > > > >Or is this strictly what is shown in the UI?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Ryan van Huuksloot
> > > > > >Staff Engineer, Infrastructure | Streaming Platform
> > > > > >[image: Shopify]
> > > > > ><
> > >
> https://www.shopify.com/?utm_medium=salessignatures&utm_source=hs_email>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >On Thu, Aug 14, 2025 at 11:17 AM Yuepeng Pan <
> panyuep...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Bumping this thread. Thanks!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > >> Yuepeng Pan
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On 2025/08/11 03:49:27 Yuepeng Pan wrote:
> > > > > >> > Hi community,
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Currently, HistoryServer supports only a quantity-based job
> > > archive
> > > > > >> retention policy [1].
> > > > > >> > This is insufficient for scenarios such as:
> > > > > >> > - Time-based retention (e.g., last X days).
> > > > > >> > - Combined rules (e.g., within 7 days AND ≤100 jobs).
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > To address these limitations, I’d like to start a discussion
> on
> > > > > FLIP-490
> > > > > >> [2],
> > > > > >> > which proposes a more flexible job archive retention mechanism
> > > that
> > > > > >> supports time-based, quantity-based, and composite strategies
> (with
> > > > > AND/OR
> > > > > >> logic).
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Looking forward to your feedback.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > >> > Yuepeng Pan
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/cae5fb4d3b6d9e0c10c3539ea4994fc1ad463b70/flink-runtime-web/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/webmonitor/history/HistoryServer.java#L241
> > > > > >> > [2]
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=332499857
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to