flink-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Frontend classpath issue
Date Fri, 24 Feb 2017 20:29:02 GMT
Hi,
I am wondering whether there is any scenario where the new way makes
anything better under normal circumstances.

I can only see how it will break things in subtle ways.

If you think there is any real benefit to the current approach I dont mind
having it as a default, otherwise I am in favor of reverting to the 1.1
default. (My logic is that the user will only observe a difference in
behavior when the new setup actually causes problems)

Gyula

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017, 17:53 Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org> wrote:

> The JIRA (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-4913) doesn't
> mention any particular user or use case.
>
> I honestly care so much if we enable or disable it by default. But since
> its the new default behavior of Flink 1.2. I'm against changing that in
> Flink 1.2.1, that's why I proposed to add a flag to disable it in 1.2.1, so
> that users upgrading from 1.2.0 to 1.2.1 don't notice it.
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljoscha@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> Did any user have problems with the Flink 1.1 behaviour? If not, we could
> disable it again, by default, and add a flag for adding the user jar to all
> the classpaths.
>
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 at 14:50 Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree with you Gyula, this change is dangerous. I have seen another case
> from a user with Hadoop dependencies that crashed in Flink 1.2.0 that
> didn't in 1.1.x
>
> I wonder if we should introduce a config flag for Flink 1.2.1 to disable
> the behavior if needed.
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Ufuk Celebi <uce@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Gyula Fóra <gyula.fora@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > I was not aware of this big change (I know it's my fault) but I am not
> > sure
> > > if I agree with the rationale.
> >
> > No comment on the actual issue from my side, but I strongly disagree
> > that this is your fault. We should have covered this better in the
> > release announcement in my opinion. Of course, this doesn't help now.
> > ;-)
> >
> > – Ufuk
> >
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message