Skip to content

[FLINK-35989][Connectors/AWS] Log errors on partially failed requests for AWS Kinesis Stream sink #201

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aws-nageshvh
Copy link

Purpose of the change

[FLINK-35989][Connectors/AWS] Log errors on partially failed requests for AWS Kinesis Stream sink

Verifying this change

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

  • Added unit tests

Significant changes

(Please check any boxes [x] if the answer is "yes". You can first publish the PR and check them afterwards, for convenience.)

  • Dependencies have been added or upgraded
  • Public API has been changed (Public API is any class annotated with @Public(Evolving))
  • Serializers have been changed
  • New feature has been introduced
    • If yes, how is this documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)

Copy link

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 16, 2025

Thanks for opening this pull request! Please check out our contributing guidelines. (https://flink.apache.org/contributing/how-to-contribute.html)

KinesisAsyncClient get();

/** Closes any resources held by this provider. */
void close();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the interface extend Closeable? Doing so allows for try-with-resources.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense. Updated the PR

streamArn,
kinesisClientProperties,
states,
null);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we have an anonymous function implementation of client provider here which calls buildClient() instead of providing null and handling null in the other constructor method? This will allow for cleaner code in the other constructor by removing the null handling.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I ended up refactoring the way client/clientprovider are injected and passed between SinkWriter and Sink which should simplify this much further. PTAL

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants