I took a quick look -- the error is the following:
*22:17:26* ERROR: (gcloud.container.clusters.update) ResponseError:
code=400, message=Operation
operation-1698804621818-e9c8fe33-d4a2-44cd-86aa-9c4e09dea259 is
currently upgrading cluster io-datastores. Please wait and try again
once it is done.
Something went wrong during the automatic credentials rotation for
IO-Datastores Cluster, performed at Wed Nov 01 00:52:45 UTC 2023. It may be
necessary to check the state of the cluster certificates. For further details
refer to the following links:
* Failing job:
Something went wrong during the automatic credentials rotation for Metrics
Cluster, performed at 2023-11-01. It may be necessary to check the state of the
cluster certificates. For further details refer to the following links:\n *
Failing job:
On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:28 AM Jan Lukavský wrote:
>
> On 10/31/23 17:44, Robert Bradshaw via dev wrote:
> > There are really two cases that make sense:
> >
> > (1) We read the event timestamps from the kafka records themselves and
> > have some external knowledge that guarantees (or at least
On 10/31/23 17:44, Robert Bradshaw via dev wrote:
There are really two cases that make sense:
(1) We read the event timestamps from the kafka records themselves and
have some external knowledge that guarantees (or at least provides a
very good heuristic) about what the timestamps of unread
There are really two cases that make sense:
(1) We read the event timestamps from the kafka records themselves and
have some external knowledge that guarantees (or at least provides a
very good heuristic) about what the timestamps of unread messages
could be in the future to set the watermark.
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/29099 [Bug]: FnAPI Java
I think that instead of deprecating and creating new version, we could
leverage the proposed update compatibility flag for this [1]. I still
have some doubts if the processing-time watermarking (and event-time
assignment) makes sense. Do we have a valid use-case for that? This is
actually the
