[jira] [Work logged] (BEAM-7520) DirectRunner timers are not strictly time ordered

["ASF GitHub Bot (Jira)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-7520?focusedWorklogId=346904&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-346904 ]

ASF GitHub Bot logged work on BEAM-7520:
----------------------------------------

                Author: ASF GitHub Bot
            Created on: 20/Nov/19 17:54
            Start Date: 20/Nov/19 17:54
    Worklog Time Spent: 10m 
      Work Description: mxm commented on issue #9869: [BEAM-7520] ignore UsesStrictTimerOrdering for both batch and streami…
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9869#issuecomment-556171768
 
 
   Shouldn't we fix this for the Flink portable Runner? Or at least track it as a known issue? The tagged issue is for the direct runner.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org


Issue Time Tracking
-------------------

    Worklog Id:     (was: 346904)
    Time Spent: 20h 40m  (was: 20.5h)

> DirectRunner timers are not strictly time ordered
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-7520
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-7520
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: runner-direct
>    Affects Versions: 2.13.0
>            Reporter: Jan Lukavský
>            Assignee: Jan Lukavský
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 2.17.0
>
>          Time Spent: 20h 40m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Let's suppose we have the following situation:
>  - statful ParDo with two timers - timerA and timerB
>  - timerA is set for window.maxTimestamp() + 1
>  - timerB is set anywhere between <windowStart, windowEnd), let's denote that timerB.timestamp
>  - input watermark moves to BoundedWindow.TIMESTAMP_MAX_VALUE
> Then the order of timers is as follows (correct):
>  - timerB
>  - timerA
> But, if timerB sets another timer (say for timerB.timestamp + 1), then the order of timers will be:
>  - timerB (timerB.timestamp)
>  - timerA (BoundedWindow.TIMESTAMP_MAX_VALUE)
>  - timerB (timerB.timestamp + 1)
> Which is not ordered by timestamp. The reason for this is that when the input watermark update is evaluated, the WatermarkManager,extractFiredTimers() will produce both timerA and timerB. That would be correct, but when timerB sets another timer, that breaks this.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)