Hi ,
Could you jstak the downstream Task (the Window) and have a look at what
the window operator is doing?
Best,
Guowei


Rahul Jain <rahul...@gmail.com> 于2019年4月10日周三 下午1:04写道:

> We are also seeing something very similar. Looks like a bug.
>
> It seems to get stuck in LocalBufferPool forever and the job has to be
> restarted.
>
> Is anyone else facing this too?
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 9:04 PM Indraneel R <vascodaga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We are trying to run a very simple flink pipeline, which is used to
>> sessionize events from a kinesis stream. Its an
>>  - event time window with a 30 min gap and
>>  - trigger interval of 15 mins and
>>  - late arrival time duration of 10 hrs
>> This is how the graph looks.
>>
>> [image: Screenshot 2019-04-10 at 12.08.25 AM.png]
>> But what we are observing is that after 2-3 days of continuous run the
>> job becomes progressively unstable and completely freezes.
>>
>> And the thread dump analysis revealed that it is actually indefinitely
>> waiting at
>>     `LocalBufferPool.requestMemorySegment(LocalBufferPool.java:261)`
>> for a memory segment to be available.
>> And while it is waiting it holds and checkpoint lock, and therefore
>> blocks all other threads as well, since they are all requesting for a lock
>> on `checkpointLock` object.
>>
>> But we are not able to figure out why its not able to get any segment.
>> Because there is no indication of backpressure, at least on the flink UI.
>> And here are our job configurations:
>>
>> *number of Taskmanagers : 4*
>> *jobmanager.heap.size: 8000m*
>> *taskmanager.heap.size: 11000m*
>> *taskmanager.numberOfTaskSlots: 4*
>> *parallelism.default: 16*
>> *taskmanager.network.memory.max: 5gb*
>> *taskmanager.network.memory.min: 3gb*
>> *taskmanager.network.memory.buffers-per-channel: 8*
>> *taskmanager.network.memory.floating-buffers-per-gate: 16*
>> *taskmanager.memory.size: 13gb  *
>>
>> *data rate : 250 messages/sec*
>> *or 1mb/sec*
>>
>>
>> Any ideas on what could be the issue?
>>
>> regards
>> -Indraneel
>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to