-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Flink: Add IcebergSinkBuilder interface allowed unification of most of operations on FlinkSink and IcebergSink Builders #11305
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
e9df431 to
d8b480e
Compare
…f operations on FlinkSink and IcebergSink Builders
d8b480e to
54de86f
Compare
flink/v1.20/flink/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/IcebergSinkBuilder.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
flink/v1.20/flink/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/IcebergSinkBuilder.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
rodmeneses
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, only minor comments. Thanks
|
@arkadius please take a look as the CI is broken |
Do you have an option to retry this build stage? It is rather impossible that extraction of an interface could cause a test to fail. I think that we have a flaky test ( |
I do not, but @pvary or @stevenzwu should be able to do it |
@pvary or @stevenzwu please retry the failing build stage |
|
@stevenzwu: The failure for |
I've run this test in a loop, many times but without successfully reproducing it. But I have a pretty fast Ryzen so my machine may not be a good representative unit. I can reproduce a similar error in the |
|
@pvary looks like the simple count based assertion is flaky. from the exception, it seems that there were 2 data files for the same bucket from the same subtask, which normally shouldn't happen. Not sure why it could happen. Note that file name is in the format of |
|
HI @stevenzwu @pvary what is needed so we can merge this change ? I understand there's a flaky test, but that's already in main. Could we move forward with this PR? I need it for my RANGE distribution PR for IcebergSink. |
|
@arkadius: The flaky test will be handled. In the meantime, could you please retrigger the tests, so we can have a green run? |
|
Thanks for the patience @arkadius. Merged the PR. Thanks for the review @rodmeneses |
…f operations on FlinkSink and IcebergSink Builders (apache#11305)
…f operations on FlinkSink and IcebergSink Builders (apache#11305) (cherry picked from commit d4f0d7e)
This PR extracts the concept of
IcebergSinkBuilderinterface from the #11219. This interface will be used to avoid code duplication in tests and to keep the interface of both implemenations of sinks similar for easier transition between them.