created https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-7122 Best -P.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 3:50 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> wrote: > Ah sorry for the lack of clarification. Each element appear only once in > the final output. The failure is: > > ====================================================================== >> FAIL: test_multiple_accumulating_firings >> (apache_beam.transforms.trigger_test.TriggerPipelineTest) >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Traceback (most recent call last): >> File "apache_beam/transforms/trigger_test.py", line 491, in >> test_multiple_accumulating_firings >> TriggerPipelineTest.all_records) >> AssertionError: Lists differ: ['1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '1',... != ['1', >> '2', '3', '4', '5', '6',... >> > [...other output...] > > (expected is:) > >> - ['1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '6', '7', '8', '9', >> '10'] >> ? ------------------------- >> > (actual is:) > >> + ['1', '2', '3', '4', '5', '6', '7', '8', '9', '10'] >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 3:45 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > >> What is the behavior you are seeing? >> >> Kenn >> >> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 3:14 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 1:58 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> I've been slowly learning a bit about life in streaming, with state, >>>> timers, triggers, etc. >>>> >>>> The other day, I tried out a trigger pipeline that did not have the >>>> behavior that I was expecting, and I am looking for feedback on whether I'm >>>> missing something, or this is a bug. >>>> >>>> Please take a look at this unit test: >>>> >>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8364/files#diff-38fb631ae11ed485e2b99507e96ff9ffR451 >>>> >>>> Is the check correct that we would expect range [1, 6) to appear twice? >>>> i.e. concat([1, 6), [1, 10]) ? >>>> >>> >>> This is what I would expect. Your test code looks good to me. Could you >>> file an issue? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> I have not tested this in other runners. >>>> Thanks >>>> -P. >>>> >>>
