[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4862?focusedWorklogId=128777&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-128777
 ]

ASF GitHub Bot logged work on BEAM-4862:
----------------------------------------

                Author: ASF GitHub Bot
            Created on: 30/Jul/18 16:31
            Start Date: 30/Jul/18 16:31
    Worklog Time Spent: 10m 
      Work Description: EricBeach commented on issue #6077: [BEAM-4862] Fixes 
bug in Spanner's MutationGroupEncoder by converting timestamps into Long and 
not Int.
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6077#issuecomment-408926407
 
 
   @chamikaramj - Done

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


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

            Worklog Id:     (was: 128777)
            Time Spent: 1.5h  (was: 1h 20m)
    Remaining Estimate: 22.5h  (was: 22h 40m)

> varint overflow -62135596800 exception with Cloud Spanner Timestamp 
> 0001-01-01T00:00:00Z
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-4862
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4862
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: io-java-gcp
>    Affects Versions: 2.5.0
>            Reporter: Eric Beach
>            Assignee: Chamikara Jayalath
>            Priority: Minor
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>          Time Spent: 1.5h
>  Remaining Estimate: 22.5h
>
> tl;dr - If you try to write a Timestamp of value "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z" as a 
> Spanner Mutation, you get an overflow error.
>  
> The crux of the issue appears to be that 0001-01-01T00:00:00Z, which is a 
> valid Timestamp per 
> [https://cloud.google.com/spanner/docs/data-types#timestamp-type], is too 
> large for an integer. See the two lines of code below. 
> [https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/release-2.5.0/sdks/java/io/google-cloud-platform/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/gcp/spanner/MutationGroupEncoder.java#L453]
> [https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/279a05604b83a54e8e5a79e13d8761f94841f326/sdks/java/core/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/util/VarInt.java#L58]
>  
>  
> Stack Trade
> {{Caused by: java.io.IOException: varint overflow -62135596800 at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.util.VarInt.decodeInt(VarInt.java:65) at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.MutationGroupEncoder.decodePrimitive(MutationGroupEncoder.java:453)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.MutationGroupEncoder.decodeModification(MutationGroupEncoder.java:326)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.MutationGroupEncoder.decodeMutation(MutationGroupEncoder.java:280)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.MutationGroupEncoder.decode(MutationGroupEncoder.java:264)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerIO$BatchFn.processElement(SpannerIO.java:1030)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerIO$BatchFn$DoFnInvoker.invokeProcessElement(Unknown
>  Source) at 
> org.apache.beam.runners.core.SimpleDoFnRunner.invokeProcessElement(SimpleDoFnRunner.java:185)
>  at 
> org.apache.beam.runners.core.SimpleDoFnRunner.processElement(SimpleDoFnRunner.java:146)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.SimpleParDoFn.processElement(SimpleParDoFn.java:323)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.ParDoOperation.process(ParDoOperation.java:43)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.OutputReceiver.process(OutputReceiver.java:48)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.GroupAlsoByWindowsParDoFn$1.output(GroupAlsoByWindowsParDoFn.java:181)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner$1.outputWindowedValue(GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner.java:102)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.BatchGroupAlsoByWindowViaIteratorsFn.processElement(BatchGroupAlsoByWindowViaIteratorsFn.java:124)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.BatchGroupAlsoByWindowViaIteratorsFn.processElement(BatchGroupAlsoByWindowViaIteratorsFn.java:53)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner.invokeProcessElement(GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner.java:115)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner.processElement(GroupAlsoByWindowFnRunner.java:73)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.GroupAlsoByWindowsParDoFn.processElement(GroupAlsoByWindowsParDoFn.java:113)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.ParDoOperation.process(ParDoOperation.java:43)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.OutputReceiver.process(OutputReceiver.java:48)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.ReadOperation.runReadLoop(ReadOperation.java:200)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.ReadOperation.start(ReadOperation.java:158)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.util.common.worker.MapTaskExecutor.execute(MapTaskExecutor.java:75)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.BatchDataflowWorker.executeWork(BatchDataflowWorker.java:391)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.BatchDataflowWorker.doWork(BatchDataflowWorker.java:360)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.BatchDataflowWorker.getAndPerformWork(BatchDataflowWorker.java:288)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.DataflowBatchWorkerHarness$WorkerThread.doWork(DataflowBatchWorkerHarness.java:134)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.DataflowBatchWorkerHarness$WorkerThread.call(DataflowBatchWorkerHarness.java:114)
>  at 
> com.google.cloud.dataflow.worker.DataflowBatchWorkerHarness$WorkerThread.call(DataflowBatchWorkerHarness.java:101)
>  at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266) at 
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
>  at 
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
>  at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)}}
>  



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

Reply via email to