Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

PR is ready for review: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9735 On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 12:03 PM Maximilian Michels wrote: > +1 > > On 29.09.19 13:44, Chad Dombrova wrote: > > I’m planning on porting the existing Java coder to Python. Any > > objections to that? > > > > -chad > > > > > > On

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

+1 On 29.09.19 13:44, Chad Dombrova wrote: I’m planning on porting the existing Java coder to Python. Any objections to that? -chad On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 1:02 PM Robert Burke > wrote: +1 I'm happy to whip together the Go SDK version once the encoding h

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

I’m planning on porting the existing Java coder to Python. Any objections to that? -chad On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 1:02 PM Robert Burke wrote: > +1 > > I'm happy to whip together the Go SDK version once the encoding has been > concretely decided. > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019, 6:07 PM Chad Dombrova

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

+1 I'm happy to whip together the Go SDK version once the encoding has been concretely decided. On Fri, Sep 27, 2019, 6:07 PM Chad Dombrova wrote: > > It would still be a standard coder - the distinction I'm proposing is that >> there are certain coders that _must_ be implemented by a new runne

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

> It would still be a standard coder - the distinction I'm proposing is that > there are certain coders that _must_ be implemented by a new runner/sdk > (for example windowedvalue, varint, kv, ...) since they are important for > SDK - runner communication, but now we're starting to standardize code

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

+1. Would be a good contribution! Reuven On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:33 PM Brian Hulette wrote: > +1, thank you! > > Note In my Row Coder PR I added a new section for "Additional Standard > Coders" - i.e. coders that have a URN, but aren't required for a new > runner/sdk to implement the beam mod

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

It would still be a standard coder - the distinction I'm proposing is that there are certain coders that _must_ be implemented by a new runner/sdk (for example windowedvalue, varint, kv, ...) since they are important for SDK - runner communication, but now we're starting to standardize coders that

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Yes, go ahead and do this (though for your usecase I'm hoping we'll be able to switch to schemas soon). On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:35 PM Chad Dombrova wrote: > > Would BooleanCoder continue to fall into this category? I was under the > impression we might make it a full fledge standard coder wit

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Would BooleanCoder continue to fall into this category? I was under the impression we might make it a full fledge standard coder with this PR. On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:32 PM Brian Hulette wrote: > +1, thank you! > > Note In my Row Coder PR I added a new section for "Additional Standard > Cod

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

+1, thank you! Note In my Row Coder PR I added a new section for "Additional Standard Coders" - i.e. coders that have a URN, but aren't required for a new runner/sdk to implement the beam model: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9188/files#diff-f0d64c2cfc4583bfe2a7e5ee59818ae2R646 I think this

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

+1 for adding the coder Please also add a test here: https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/model/fn-execution/src/main/resources/org/apache/beam/model/fnexecution/v1/standard_coders.yaml On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 5:17 PM Chad Dombrova wrote: > Are there any dissenting votes to making a Bool

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Are there any dissenting votes to making a BooleanCoder a standard (portable) coder? I'm happy to make a PR to implement a BooleanCoder in python (and to add the Java BooleanCoder to the ModelCoderRegistrar) if everyone agrees that this is useful. -chad On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 3:32 PM Robert Br

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

I think boolean is useful to have. What I'm more skeptical of is adding standard types for variations like UnsignedInteger16, etc. that don't have natural representations in all languages. On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 2:46 PM Brian Hulette wrote: > > Some more context from an offline discussion I had

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Some more context from an offline discussion I had with +Robert Bradshaw a while ago: We both agreed all of the coders listed in BEAM-7996 should be implemented in Python, but didn't come to a conclusion on whether or not they should actually be _standard_ coders, versus just being implicitly stan

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Yes, noted here: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9188/files#diff-f0d64c2cfc4583bfe2a7e5ee59818ae2R678 and that links to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-7996 Kenn On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:57 PM Reuven Lax wrote: > Java has one, implemented as a byte coder. My guess is that nobod

Re: Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Java has one, implemented as a byte coder. My guess is that nobody has gotten around to implementing it yet for portability. On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:44 PM Chad Dombrova wrote: > Hi all, > It seems a bit unfortunate that there isn’t a portable way to serialize a > boolean value. > > I’m workin

Why is there no standard boolean coder?

Hi all, It seems a bit unfortunate that there isn’t a portable way to serialize a boolean value. I’m working on porting my external PubsubIO PR over to use the improved schema-based external transform API in python, but because of this limitation I can’t use boolean values. For example, this fails