On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 1:18 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 10:08 AM Joey Tran
> wrote:
>
Are there places on the SDK side that expect unique labels? Or in
>> non-updateable runners?
>>
>
> That's a good question. The label eventually ends up here:
>
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 10:08 AM Joey Tran
wrote:
> That makes sense. Would you suggest the new option simply suppress the
> RuntimeError and use the non-unique label?
>
Yes. (Or, rather, not raise it.)
> Are there places on the SDK side that expect unique labels? Or in
> non-updateable
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 4:59 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> OK, so how about this for a concrete proposal:
>
> sink:
> type: WriteToParquet
> config:
> path:
> "/beam/filesytem/{record.my_col}-{timestamp.year}{timestamp.month}{timestamp.day}"
>
This is an example, right ?
That makes sense. Would you suggest the new option simply suppress the
RuntimeError and use the non-unique label? Are there places on the SDK side
that expect unique labels? Or in non-updateable runners?
Would making `--auto_unique_labels` a mutually exclusive option with
streaming be a
Hi,
it has been some time since Euphoria extension [1] has been adopted by
Beam as a possible "Java 8 API". Beam has evolved from that time a lot,
the current API seems actually more elegant than the original Euphoria's
and last but not least, it has no maintainers and no known users. If
Thanks for the PR.
I think we should follow Java and allow non-unique labels, but not provide
automatic uniquification, In particular, the danger of using a counter is
that one can get accidental (and potentially hard to check) off-by-one
collisions. As a concrete example, imagine one partitions
Hi,
I think there's been already said nearly everything in this thread, but
... it is time for Friday discussions. :)
Today I recalled of a discussion we've had long time ago, when we were
designing Euphoria (btw, deprecating and removing it is still on my todo
list, I should create a vote
For posterity: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/28984
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 7:29 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> I would definitely support a PR making this an option. Changing the
> default would be a rather big change that would require more thought.
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 4:24 PM Joey
This is your daily summary of Beam's current high priority issues that may need
attention.
See https://beam.apache.org/contribute/issue-priorities for the meaning and
expectations around issue priorities.
Unassigned P1 Issues:
https://github.com/apache/beam/issues/28909 [Stuck Test]:
