Good to hear it helped!
G
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 3:50 AM 李 琳 <leili...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi Gabor,
>
> Thanks for your advice. I attempted to use the state processor API to
> resolve my issue, and it seems to be performing well.
>
> First, I read the savepoint file and removed the state that couldn't be
> restored by the operator ID. Finally, I used the API to rewrite the new
> savepoint file, replacing the old one, the new Job can restor state and
> running well.
>
> Best regards, leilinee
>
> ------------------------------
> *发件人:* Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com>
> *发送时间:* 2025年2月10日 16:48
> *收件人:* 李 琳 <leili...@outlook.com>
> *抄送:* user@flink.apache.org <user@flink.apache.org>
> *主题:* Re: Skip Restore Incompatibility of Key Serializer for Savepoint
>
> Seems like I was not clear in my previous suggestions.
> `execution.savepoint.ignore-unclaimed-state=true` would help only if
> FLINK-20375 [1] would be implemented.
>
> Please has a look at the state processor API [2]. I would try something
> like:
>
> SavepointWriter .fromExistingSavepoint(env, oldPath, new
> ...StateBackend())
> .removeOperator(OperatorIdentifier.forUid("your_operator_uid_which_is_problematic"))
> .write(newPath);
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-20375
> [2]
> https://nightlies.apache.org/flink/flink-docs-master/docs/libs/state_processor_api/
>
> BR,
> G
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 4:27 AM 李 琳 <leili...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Gabor,
>
> I sincerely appreciate your suggestion to set the configuration
> 'execution.state-recovery.ignore-unclaimed-state: true' in the Flink
> configuration file. I put it into my test.
> However, unfortunately, it seems that this configuration didn't have the
> expected effect. When I ran my Flink job, it once again threw an exception,
> due to an incompatibility in the key serializer between the original and
> the new state. Given that the outcome didn't match our anticipation, I was
> wondering if you could share more in - depth details about this
> configuration.
> Your insights would be of great help to me in resolving this issue. Thank
> you very much in advance.
> Best regards，Leilinee
>
> 获取 Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> ------------------------------
> *发件人:* Gabor Somogyi <gabor.g.somo...@gmail.com>
> *发送时间:* Saturday, February 8, 2025 4:58:48 PM
> *收件人:* 李 琳 <leili...@outlook.com>
> *抄送:* user@flink.apache.org <user@flink.apache.org>
> *主题:* Re: Skip Restore Incompatibility of Key Serializer for Savepoint
>
> Hi leilinee,
>
> Since Flink SQL is not supporting operator uid configuration there are
> only hard ways.
> State operator uid change +
> `execution.savepoint.ignore-unclaimed-state=true` would be the easy way.
>
> Depending on you constraints either you use the state processor API and
> remove the
> operator which belongs to this statement or you not using the savepoint at
> all (no savepoint restore).
> Be aware that these ways you're going to loose state data so be careful.
>
> If you have the possibility to invest more time then with the state
> processor API you
> can do the state migration where you don't loose anything.
>
> BR,
> G
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 8, 2025 at 7:40 AM 李 琳 <leili...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> In a Flink job using statementSet, I have two DMLs for index calculation.
> I made a modification to one of the DMLs, changing the group keys from
> "*distinct_id,
> $city, $province, window_start, window_end*" to "*distinct_id,
> window_start, window_end*". When attempting to restore the job from a
> savepoint, Flink throws an exception due to an incompatibility in the key
> serializer between the original and the new state.
>
> I'm seeking a way to make Flink skip the state related to the incompatible
> key serializer and proceed with restoring the unmodified DMLs. Are there
> any more effective approaches to achieve this?
>
> Best regards, leilinee
>
>
