Re: Serialization for org.apache.beam.sdk.util.WindowedValue$*

Oh sorry, of course I meant Thomas Groh in my previous email.. But @Thomas Weise this example might help, this is how the Spark runner uses

Re: Serialization for org.apache.beam.sdk.util.WindowedValue$*

Thomas is right, though in my case, I encountered this issue when using Spark's new API that uses Encoders not just for serialization but also for "translating" the object into a schema of

Re: Serialization for org.apache.beam.sdk.util.WindowedValue$*

The Beam Model ensures that all PCollections have a Coder; the PCollection Coder is the standard way to materialize the elements of a PCollection[1][2]. Most SDK-provided classes that will need to be transferred across the wire have an associated coder, and some additional default datatypes have

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #60

Gonna take a look as well. Regards JB On 06/02/2016 06:14 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote: New type of error; investigation in progress. On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Apache Jenkins Server < jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote: See

Re: Serialization for org.apache.beam.sdk.util.WindowedValue$*

Hi Amit, Thanks for the help. I implemented the same serialization workaround for the PipelineOptions. Since every distributed runner will have to solve this, would it make sense to provide the serialization support along with the interface proxy? Here is the exception I get with with

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #60

New type of error; investigation in progress. On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Apache Jenkins Server < jenk...@builds.apache.org> wrote: > See > > > Changes: > > [aljoscha.krettek] [BEAM-295] Remove erroneous close() calls

Build failed in Jenkins: beam_Release_NightlySnapshot #60

See Changes: [aljoscha.krettek] [BEAM-295] Remove erroneous close() calls in Flink Create Sources [bchambers] Forward port changes to GC holds [davor] Update pom.xml files formatting [davor] [maven-release-plugin]

Re: 0.1.0-incubating release

Another annoying thing is the main parent POM artifactId. Now, it's just "parent". What do you think about renaming to "beam-parent" ? Regarding the source distribution name, I would cancel this staging to fix that (I will have a PR ready soon). Thoughts ? Regards JB On 06/02/2016 03:46