Now I see what you're doing. In general you should look for the UID pair in
the vertex, like this (several operators can belong to a vertex):
Optional<OperatorIDPair> pair =
vertex.get().getOperatorIDs().stream()
.filter(o ->
o.getUserDefinedOperatorID().get().toString().equals(uidHash))
.findFirst();
assertEquals(uidHash, pair.get().getUserDefinedOperatorID().get().toString());
Please load your savepoint with SavepointLoader and analyze what kind of
operators are inside and why is your app blowing up.
G
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 9:29 AM Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Salva,
>
> Which version is this?
>
> BR,
> G
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 8:46 PM Salva Alcántara <salcantara...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have a pipeline where I'm trying to add a new operator. The problem is
>> that originally I forgot to specify the uid for one source. To remedy this,
>> I'm using setUidHash, providing the operator id to match that in my
>> savepoints / current job graph.
>>
>> Unless I'm doing something wrong, what I've observed is that the value
>> provided to setUidHash is completely ignored by Flink. I've tried to
>> summarize it in the following test:
>>
>> ```java
>> @Test
>> public void testSetUidHash() throws Exception {
>> var uidHash = "cbc357ccb763df2852fee8c4fc7d55f2";
>> env.fromElements(1, 2, 3)
>> .name("123")
>> .setUidHash(uidHash)
>> //.uid("123")
>> .print()
>> .name("print")
>> .uid("print");
>>
>> var vertex = StreamSupport
>>
>> .stream(env.getStreamGraph().getJobGraph().getVertices().spliterator(),
>> false)
>> .filter(v -> v.getName().equals("Source: 123"))
>> .findFirst()
>> .orElseThrow();
>>
>> assertEquals(uidHash, vertex.getID());
>> // Fails with java.lang.AssertionError (if setUidHash is used):
>> // expected:<cbc357ccb763df2852fee8c4fc7d55f2> but
>> was:<bc764cd8ddf7a0cff126f51c16239658>
>> // Interestingly, the actual value does not even depend on the
>> provided value (uidHash)!
>>
>> // assertEquals("6a7f660d1b2d5b9869cf0ecee3a17e42", vertex.getID());
>> // Passes (if uid is used instead)
>> }
>> ```
>>
>> Can anyone confirm whether this is a bug?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Salva
>>
>
