[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21626?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17306802#comment-17306802
]
Roman Khachatryan edited comment on FLINK-21626 at 3/23/21, 6:36 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I've published a [PR|https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15331] to make the
JobID non-optional.
[~kezhuw] could you take a look?
was (Author: roman_khachatryan):
I've published a PR to make the JobID non-optional.
[~kezhuw] could you take a look?
> Consider shaping newly introduced RuntimeContext.getJobId to return JobID
> with no Optional wrapper
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-21626
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-21626
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: API / Core
> Affects Versions: 1.13.0
> Reporter: Kezhu Wang
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 1.13.0
>
>
> Currently, this newly introduced {{RuntimeContext.getJobId()}} returns
> {{Optional<JobID>}}. The only path where it returns no job id is
> {{RuntimeUDFContext}}(through {{CollectionExecutor}} through
> {{CollectionEnvironment}}).
> But after {{DataSet}} dropped, there will be no paths to return no job id.
> Both FLINK-21581 and [my
> comment|https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/15053#issuecomment-789410967]
> raised this concern. But different with FLINK-21581, I think we could return
> an environment/executor/plan level unique job id in {{RuntimeUDFContext}} for
> this new api. This way there will be no breaking change after {{DataSet}}
> dropped. And more importantly, a careful chosen job id does not hurt callers
> of {{RuntimeUDFContext}} in my opinion.
> cc [~chesnay] [~roman_khachatryan] [~aljoscha] [~sewen]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
