[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6399?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jeff Klukas updated BEAM-6399:
------------------------------
Description:
{{In a pipeline with unbounded input, if a user defines a custom trigger and
calls FileIO.withNumShards(ValueProvider<Integer>), they may see an
IllegalArgumentException at runtime due to incompatible windows.}}
{{ }}
{{ For example, consider this compound trigger:}}
{{ }}
{{Window.into(new GlobalWindows())}}
{{ .triggering(Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(}}
{{ AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000),}}
{{ AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()}}
{{ .plusDelayOf(Duration.standardMinutes(10)))))}}
{{ .discardingFiredPanes()}}
Using that windowing with a numShards ValueProvider yields:
{{Inputs to Flatten had incompatible
triggers:}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000),
AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane().plusDelayOf(1
minute))),}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(1),
AfterSynchronizedProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()))}}
In the case of ValueProvider for numShards, WriteFiles creates both a sharded
and unsharded collection; the first goes through one GroupByKey while the other
goes through 2. These two collections are then flattened together and they have
incompatible triggers due to the double-grouped collection using a continuation
trigger.
If the user instead specifies a positive non-ValueProvider numShards, then a
different code path is followed that avoids this incompatibility.
It looks like WriteFiles may need to be implemented differently to avoid
combining collections with potentially incompatible triggers.
was:
In a pipeline with unbounded input, if a user defines a custom trigger and
calls FileIO.withNumShards(ValueProvider<Integer>), they may see an
IllegalArgumentException at runtime due to incompatible windows.
For example, consider this compound trigger:
{{Window.into(new GlobalWindows())}}
{{ .triggering(Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(}}{{ }}
{{ AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000), }}{{ }}
{{ AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()}}
{{ .plusDelayOf(Duration.standardMinutes(10)))))}}{{
.discardingFiredPanes()}}
Using that windowing with a numShards ValueProvider yields:
{{Inputs to Flatten had incompatible
triggers:}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000),
AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane().plusDelayOf(1
minute))),}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(1),
AfterSynchronizedProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()))}}
In the case of ValueProvider for numShards, WriteFiles creates both a sharded
and unsharded collection; the first goes through one GroupByKey while the other
goes through 2. These two collections are then flattened together and they have
incompatible triggers due to the double-grouped collection using a continuation
trigger.
If the user instead specifies a positive non-ValueProvider numShards, then a
different code path is followed that avoids this incompatibility.
It looks like WriteFiles may need to be implemented differently to avoid
combining collections with potentially incompatible triggers.
> FileIO errors on unbounded input with nondefault trigger
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-6399
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6399
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: io-java-files
> Reporter: Jeff Klukas
> Priority: Major
>
> {{In a pipeline with unbounded input, if a user defines a custom trigger and
> calls FileIO.withNumShards(ValueProvider<Integer>), they may see an
> IllegalArgumentException at runtime due to incompatible windows.}}
> {{ }}
> {{ For example, consider this compound trigger:}}
> {{ }}
> {{Window.into(new GlobalWindows())}}
> {{ .triggering(Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(}}
> {{ AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000),}}
> {{ AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()}}
> {{ .plusDelayOf(Duration.standardMinutes(10)))))}}
> {{ .discardingFiredPanes()}}
>
> Using that windowing with a numShards ValueProvider yields:
>
> {{Inputs to Flatten had incompatible
> triggers:}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(10000),
> AfterProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane().plusDelayOf(1
> minute))),}}{{Repeatedly.forever(AfterFirst.of(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(1),
> AfterSynchronizedProcessingTime.pastFirstElementInPane()))}}
>
> In the case of ValueProvider for numShards, WriteFiles creates both a
> sharded and unsharded collection; the first goes through one GroupByKey while
> the other goes through 2. These two collections are then flattened together
> and they have incompatible triggers due to the double-grouped collection
> using a continuation trigger.
>
> If the user instead specifies a positive non-ValueProvider numShards, then a
> different code path is followed that avoids this incompatibility.
>
> It looks like WriteFiles may need to be implemented differently to avoid
> combining collections with potentially incompatible triggers.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
