noorall opened a new pull request, #25551:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/25551

   ## What is the purpose of the change
   
   Currently, the ExecutionVertexInputInfo describes the task's input through a 
combination of a PartitionRange and a SubpartitionRange. However, in the case 
of skewed join optimization, we need to split a group of data corresponding to 
the specific key, which may result in a downstream task subscribing to multiple 
combinations of PartitionRanges and SubpartitionRanges.
   
   Therefore, we need to modify the ExecutionVertexInputInfo to describe the 
input data as multiple combinations of PartitionRanges and SubpartitionRanges 
to meet the requirements of the aforementioned scenario and improve Flink's 
flexibility in describing the task's inputs.
   
   
   ## Brief change log
   
     - Modify the description of the input in ExecutionVertexInputInfo.
     - Modify the connect function for edges.
     - Modify the InputGate creation logic of the network layer to adapt to 
this change.
   
   ## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
   
     - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
     - The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with 
`@Public(Evolving)`: (no)
     - The serializers: (no)
     - The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (no)
     - Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its 
components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn, ZooKeeper: (no)
     - The S3 file system connector: (yes / no / don't know)
   
   ## Documentation
   
     - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
     - If yes, how is the feature documented? (not documented)
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@flink.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org

Reply via email to