You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to issues@flink.apache.org by "Till Rohrmann (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2019/05/28 16:48:00 UTC

[jira] [Commented] (FLINK-12621) Use MiniCluster instead of JobExecutor

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12621?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16849920#comment-16849920 ] 

Till Rohrmann commented on FLINK-12621:
---------------------------------------

Before starting implementing a solution [~zjffdu], let's try to first agree that we want to resolve this issue and how we want to solve it. I personally don't see much harm in having the {{JobExecutor}} interface. It might not be strictly necessary but why risking that we break things in the wake of refactoring it w/o gaining much additional value.

> Use MiniCluster instead of JobExecutor
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: FLINK-12621
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-12621
>             Project: Flink
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 1.8.0
>            Reporter: Jeff Zhang
>            Assignee: Jeff Zhang
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>          Time Spent: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> JobExecutor is specifically used for local mode, I don't think we need to introduce new class/interface for local mode, we should use the existing MiniCluster.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)