Flink: If IcebergSink writeParallelism is not specified, defaults to the input source parallelism #13260
+46
−7
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rodmeneses
changed the title
rodmeneses
force-pushed
the
sinkDefaultParallelism
branch
from
12447ac to
e403b98
Compare
rodmeneses
changed the title
gyfora
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2025
mxm
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2025
flink/v2.0/flink/src/test/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/TestIcebergSink.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
flink/v2.0/flink/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/IcebergSink.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…the input source parallelism
rodmeneses
force-pushed
the
sinkDefaultParallelism
branch
from
ba49b0f to
08e3fab
Compare
stevenzwu
reviewed
Jun 12, 2025
flink/v2.0/flink/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/IcebergSink.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
stevenzwu
reviewed
Jun 12, 2025
flink/v2.0/flink/src/test/java/org/apache/iceberg/flink/sink/TestIcebergSink.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
stevenzwu
reviewed
Jun 12, 2025
|
|
||
| // since the sink write parallelism was null, it asserts that the default parallelism used was | ||
| // the input source parallelism | ||
| assertThat(sink.getTransformation().getParallelism()).isEqualTo(dataStream.getParallelism()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sink has multi-stage DAG. does sink.getTransformation get the writer operator? or writer parallelism is always the same as the transformation parallelism?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I did a debugging and could confirm it.
| .tableLoader(tableLoader) | ||
| .tableSchema(SimpleDataUtil.FLINK_SCHEMA) | ||
| .distributionMode(DistributionMode.NONE) | ||
| .writeParallelism(parallelism) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this parallelism could be the same as the input stream parallelism. we need to set the parallelism to be differnt as the input stream parallelism
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the inputStream parallelism is always 1 and cannot easily be changed (it is a non-parallel source). So when the parallelism test template parameter is 2, the test is asserting that the writeParallelism is actually 2 (and not 1 as the parallelism of the inputSource)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, if the writeParallelism is not specified, the IcebergSink will default to use the job parallelism.
Instead, we should default to the inputSource parallelism, to promote chaining.
This PR tracks that change, consequently bringing parity with the FlinkSink.
re: #12071 (comment)
cc: @stevenzwu @mxm @pvary @gyfora