[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8910?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16440793#comment-16440793
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-8910:
---------------------------------------

Github user StefanRRichter commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/5676#discussion_r182048477
  
    --- Diff: 
flink-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/api/common/TaskInfo.java ---
    @@ -107,4 +131,12 @@ public int getAttemptNumber() {
        public String getTaskNameWithSubtasks() {
                return this.taskNameWithSubtasks;
        }
    +
    +   /**
    +    * Returns the allocation id for where this task is executed.
    +    * @return the allocation id for where this task is executed.
    +    */
    +   public String getAllocationID() {
    --- End diff --
    
    @sihuazhou that approach would not allow us to test that the scheduling 
works proper when having more than one slot per TM, which is a useful thing to 
test for. Furthermore, this also silently makes the assumption that there is a 
connection between allocation id and PID, but the test might want to also 
validate that this is actually true.


> Introduce automated end-to-end test for local recovery (including sticky 
> scheduling)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-8910
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-8910
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: State Backends, Checkpointing
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.0
>            Reporter: Stefan Richter
>            Assignee: Stefan Richter
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 1.5.0
>
>
> We should have an automated end-to-end test that can run nightly to check 
> that sticky allocation and local recovery work as expected.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to