[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10516?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17548815#comment-17548815
 ] 

Danny McCormick commented on BEAM-10516:
----------------------------------------

This issue has been migrated to https://github.com/apache/beam/issues/20430

> Including TableProvider IO dependencies as `provided` can lead to 
> ClassDefNotFoundErrors for users
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-10516
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10516
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: dsl-sql, sdk-java-core
>            Reporter: Scott Lukas
>            Priority: P3
>              Labels: Clarified, beam-fixit
>
> The SQL extension uses ServiceLoader to load table providers: 
> https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/v2.22.0/sdks/java/extensions/sql/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/extensions/sql/impl/BeamCalciteSchemaFactory.java#L85
> And the IOs used in the built-in table providers (e.g. pubsub json, avro, 
> parquet, ...) are included as {{provided}} dependencies, not {{compile}}. 
> This means that we are able to build the sql extension jar, and AutoService 
> picks them up and records them in META-INF/services. However because they are 
> {{provided}} dependencies, the necessary IO modules are not marked as 
> dependencies for the SQL extension.
> This means consumers of :sdks:java:extensions:sql (like 
> :sdks:java:extensions:sql:jdbc) can end up with ServiceLoader registering a 
> TableProvider that will fail with ClassDefNotFoundError, unless they add the 
> necessary dependency.
> Possible solution: Refactor TableProvider to beam core (or another shared 
> module) in order to solve Service Loader errors with 
> SchemaCapableIOTableProviderWrapper. Remove getTableType overrides of 
> SchemaCapableIOProviderWrapper when fixed.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)

Reply via email to