I have made some incremental progress on this and wanted to release our
first vendored dependency of gRPC 1.13.1 since I was able to fix a good
number of the import/code completion errors that Intellij was experiencing.
I have published an example of what the jar/pom looks like in the Apache
A quick follow-up on using current PortableRunner.
I followed the exact three steps as Ankur and Maximilian shared in
https://beam.apache.org/roadmap/portability/#python-on-flink ; The
wordcount example keeps hanging after 10 minutes. I also tried specifying
explicit input/output args, either
Hi,
I just added some thing related to BeamSQL.
-Rui
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 3:26 AM Etienne Chauchot
wrote:
> Hi,
> I just added some things that were done.
>
> Etienne
>
> Le lundi 12 novembre 2018 à 12:22 +, Matthias Baetens a écrit :
>
> Looks great, thanks for the effort and for
In current PR, there will be two parameters that can control the final row
group size, row_group_buffer_size and record_batch_size. The records are
first stored as a list of columns and then transformed into a record batch
(a data structure defined in pyarrow) when the number of records in the
+1 and parallelize the 3 lint tasks
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 10:43 AM Thomas Weise wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ruoyun Huang wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 8:29 AM Maximilian Michels
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On 13.11.18 14:22, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>> >
I would rather not have the builder method and run into the quota issue
then require the builder method and still run into quota issues.
On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 5:25 PM Reuven Lax wrote:
> I'm a bit worried about making this automatic, as it can have unexpected
> side effects on BigQuery
+1
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ruoyun Huang wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 8:29 AM Maximilian Michels wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On 13.11.18 14:22, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>> > I really like how spottless runs separately and quickly for Java code.
>> > Should we do the same for Python
+1 to Option 3
I'd rather have each SDK have a single point of well defined complexity to
do something general, than have to make tiny but simple changes. Less toil
and maintenance in the long run per SDK.
Similarly I don't have time to make it happen right now.
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 9:22 AM
Discovering options from the job server would be the only way to perform
full validation (and provide upfront help to the user).
The runner cannot perform full validation, since it is not aware of the
user and SDK options (that it has to forward to the SDK worker).
Special runner options flag to
+1
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 8:29 AM Maximilian Michels wrote:
> +1
>
> On 13.11.18 14:22, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> > I really like how spottless runs separately and quickly for Java code.
> > Should we do the same for Python lint?
> >
>
--
Ruoyun Huang
+1
On 13.11.18 14:22, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
I really like how spottless runs separately and quickly for Java code.
Should we do the same for Python lint?
Sounds, then, like we need to a define a new `AutoValueSchema extends
SchemaProvider` and users would opt-in to this via the DefaultSchema
annotation:
@DefaultSchema(AutoValueSchema.class)
@AutoValue
public abstract MyClass ...
Since we already have the JavaBean and JavaField reflection-based
+0
Regards
JB
On 09/11/2018 02:47, Ahmet Altay wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please review the following statement:
>
> "2.7.0 branch will be marked as the long-term-support (LTS) release
> branch. This branch will be supported for a window of 6 months starting
> from the day it is marked as an LTS
I really like how spottless runs separately and quickly for Java code.
Should we do the same for Python lint?
Was there resolution on how to handle row group size, given that it's
hard to pick a decent default? IIRC, the ideal was to base this on
byte sizes; will this be in v1 or will there be other parameter(s)
that we'll have to support going forward?
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:42 PM Heejong Lee wrote:
Hi,I just added some things that were done.
Etienne
Le lundi 12 novembre 2018 à 12:22 +, Matthias Baetens a écrit :
> Looks great, thanks for the effort and for including the Summit blogpost,
> Rose!
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 at 22:55 Rose Nguyen wrote:
> > Hi Beamers:
> >
> >
> > Time to sync
16 matches
Mail list logo
