[HUDI-7507] Fixing Rollbacks and Cleaning to acquire locks as needed

[nsivabalan]

Change Logs

• If there are two concurrent rollback planning by 2 concurrent writers, each could write two rollback plans to timeline. We are fixing that in this patch. Also, following up on [HUDI-7507] Adding timestamp ordering validation before creating requested instant #11580, we are adding locks to rollback planning as well.
• Also, for cleaning, we added timestamp validation in PR 11580, but locks were not taken. We are adding locks to clean as well for performing timestamp validation.

This is targetted against 0.x branch.

Impact

Robust rollback planning even in the event of concurrent writers/planners.

Risk level (write none, low medium or high below)

low

Documentation Update

Describe any necessary documentation update if there is any new feature, config, or user-facing change. If not, put "none".

• The config description must be updated if new configs are added or the default value of the configs are changed
• Any new feature or user-facing change requires updating the Hudi website. Please create a Jira ticket, attach the
  ticket number here and follow the instruction to make
  changes to the website.

Contributor's checklist

• Read through contributor's guide
• Change Logs and Impact were stated clearly
• Adequate tests were added if applicable
• CI passed

[danny0405]

Not sure we introduce txnManager into hoodie table? It looks like it is only used for rollback, can we move it out?

[nsivabalan]

hey @danny0405 :
wrt to not introducing TransactionManager in HoodieTable, here are the changes it might introduce.

1. Flink: CompactionPlanOperator instantiate TransactionManager and pass it to CompactionUtil.rollbackCompaction(table). Or instantiate TransactionManager in CompactionUtil.
2. RunCompactionActionExecutor.execute() calls into preCommit which can trigger rollback. And so, this percolates to HoodieTable.logCompact, HoodieTable.compact
   -> which in turn goes into HoodieTableServiceClient.logCompact and HoodieTableServiceClient.comact().
   but this means, we need to change public apis in HoodieTable for compact() and logCompact(), rollback APIs to take in an Option. All of our public apis are very tightly designed. This causes divergence.
3. Flink: CompactionCommitSink calls into rollbackCompaction(). We need to introduce TransactionManager in CompactionCommitSink.
4. HoodieFlinkCompactor.compact() could call into rollbackCompaction(). Might have to add TransactionManager to HoodieFlinkCompactor.
5. BaseHoodieTableServiceClient.purgePendingClustering() can call into rollback. BaseHoodieTableServiceClient.cluster() also could call into rollback. We just need to pass in the TransactionManager.

May main concern is the change in public apis like HoodieTable.compact(), HoodieTable.logCompact(), HoodieTable.rollback*() APIs.

Attaching pic on the APIs we have in HoodieTable :

For Flink specifically, I might need some help as well (whether CompactionCommitSink is the right place to introduce the TransactionManager or not).

Also, I was looking at places where we instantiate TransactionManager, looks like we don't have it clean either.

We have many usages in ActionExecutors which are expected to be called from Hoodie*Table. So, not sure if its worth cleaning it up in this patch where we are looking to fix rollback scheduling. This could be much larger scope if we wanted to clean up the instantiations of TransactionManager to standardize it and keep it at either WriteClient or TableServiceClient.

Let me know what do you think.

[danny0405]

May main concern is the change in public apis like HoodieTable.compact(), HoodieTable.logCompact(), HoodieTable.rollback*() APIs.

The scheduling of clean and rollback should be already separeted from other write APIs I think, maybe just add the fresh new txn manager for these 3 APIs should be good already.

[hudi-bot]

CI report:

• 911c925 UNKNOWN
• 31a39b9 Azure: FAILURE

Bot commands

@hudi-bot supports the following commands:

• @hudi-bot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[nsivabalan]

@danny0405 : ready for review based on our sync up yesterday.

[nsivabalan]