Hi Mani,

Just to let you know I think it would make sense to either

(1) implement checkpointing for BoundedReadFromUnboundedSource
or
(2) throw an error in case of a provided checkpoint mark

Like you pointed out, ignoring it like we currently do, does not seem like a feasible solution.

-Max

On 21.07.20 16:16, Sunny, Mani Kolbe wrote:
Hi Alexey,

I did explore that route. The problem there is to identify what timestamp to use.  While processing records, you can capture the timestamp. This cannot be processing time, but event time on the Kinesis record. As far I see, event time on Kinesis record is generated from ApproximateArrivalTimestamp field on getRecords API call. According to Kinesis doc[1]: There are no guarantees about the time stamp accuracy, or that the time stamp is always increasing. For example, records in a shard or across a stream might have time stamps that are out of order.

So there is a chance to skip records if timestamps captured on checkpoint were out of order.  Also there is no provision to provide per shard timestamp while initializing KinesisReader.

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/kinesis/latest/APIReference/API_GetRecords.html

Regards,

Mani

*From:* Alexey Romanenko <aromanenko....@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2020 2:01 PM
*To:* user@beam.apache.org
*Subject:* Re: Unbounded sources unable to recover from checkpointMark when withMaxReadTime() is used

*CAUTION:*This email originated from outside of D&B. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Mani,

Knowing when you last run was stopped (since you use batch mode), could you leverage “withInitialPositionInStream()” or “withInitialTimestampInStream()” for KinesisIO in this case?

Alexey



    On 21 Jul 2020, at 13:40, Sunny, Mani Kolbe <sun...@dnb.com
    <mailto:sun...@dnb.com>> wrote:

    Hi Max,

    Thank you for your reply. Our use case is to run a batch job against
    a Kinesis source. Our downstream systems are still on batch mode. So
    this application will read from the Kinesis source periodically and
    generate batched outputs. Without ability to resume from a
    checkpoint, it will be reading entire stream every time.

    Regards,
    Mani

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org <mailto:m...@apache.org>>
    Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 11:38 AM
    To:user@beam.apache.org <mailto:user@beam.apache.org>
    Cc: Sunny, Mani Kolbe <sun...@dnb.com <mailto:sun...@dnb.com>>
    Subject: Re: Unbounded sources unable to recover from checkpointMark
    when withMaxReadTime() is used

    CAUTION: This email originated from outside of D&B. Please do not
    click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
    know the content is safe.


    Hi Mani,

    BoundedReadFromUnboundedSource was originally intended to be used in
    batch pipelines. In batch, runners typically do not perform
    checkpointing. In case of failures, they re-run the entire pipeline.

    Keep in mind that, even with checkpointing, reading for a finite
    time in the processing time domain from an unbounded source rarely
    gives consistent results across runs.

    However, ignoring the checkpoint looks problematic. We may want to
    fail during checkpointing to prevent violating correctness (e.g.
    exactly-once semantics).

    -Max

    On 21.07.20 11:36, Sunny, Mani Kolbe wrote:

        Observed on v2.22.0

        When withMaxReadTime() is used, Beam creates a
        BoundedReadFromUnboundedSource [1].  The ReadFn<T> class in
        BoundedReadFromUnboundedSource which is responsible for reading
        records from source. You can see this class doesnt verify if
        there is
        a recoverable checkpoint exist. Instead it always creates Reader
        with
        checkpointMark set as null [2].

        Is this desired behavior? More importantly, do you guys recommend
        using
        withMaxReadTime() in production setup? Or is this more for demo
        usecases?

        I have created a jira for the same (BEAM-104934
        <https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fiss
        ues.apache.org
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fues.apache.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788163122&sdata=KChY36xii%2FraHclM0hdGwsKZ5J1xujbNv1EkuC0ESAQ%3D&reserved=0>%2Fjira%2Fbrowse%2FBEAM-104934&amp;data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40dnb.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788173119&sdata=BAguU1NKdtPQbGgzECnCiUAFM2czb3USeS47MIYwF8k%3D&reserved=0>%7Cc9e9f11464ac4242099508d82d6247e4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309247422805087&amp;sdata=lrHfvqU6YzbZsE6Ks0ZRSgsOmbYFQim3sbgCJrpAQPA%3D&amp;reserved=0>)
        and looking to work on a patch for the same. But would like a
        confirmation on the above first.

        Regards,

        Mani

        Reference:

        [1]https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fg
        ithub.com
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fithub.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788173119&sdata=KqDiTeve0ZFZAGsLAyB5WXrd9VWfPSlLXRS6O457rxc%3D&reserved=0>%2Fapache%2Fbeam%2Fblob%2Fv2.22.0%2Fsdks%2Fjava%2Fcore%2Fsrc%
        2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fapache%2Fbeam%2Fsdk%2Fio%2FRead.java%23L205&amp;
        data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40dnb.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788173119&sdata=BAguU1NKdtPQbGgzECnCiUAFM2czb3USeS47MIYwF8k%3D&reserved=0>%7Cc9e9f11464ac4242099508d82d6247e4%7C1
        9e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309247422805087&amp;sdata
        =dP3jW44zRDjNZSSEXM401CVF6926D9nt6wOCADbOW%2Bw%3D&amp;reserved=0

        [2]https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fg
        ithub.com
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fithub.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788183111&sdata=NIHvuFSg8bDcXhx13GoOwmlZIj0ZUiDYN8McJPRM%2BS0%3D&reserved=0>%2Fapache%2Fbeam%2Fblob%2Fv2.22.0%2Fsdks%2Fjava%2Fcore%2Fsrc%2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fapache%2Fbeam%2Fsdk%2Fio%2FBoundedReadFromUnboundedSource.java%23L193&amp;data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com
        
<https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40dnb.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CSunnyM%40dnb.com%7Ce368fe78c733418a0a8908d82d7627f4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309332788183111&sdata=pEtBJhESgkVWqgLp0HjDW9cWcY7ptcva7lzdUrx5Xeg%3D&reserved=0>%7Cc9e9f11464ac4242099508d82d6247e4%7C19e2b708bf12437597198dec42771b3e%7C0%7C0%7C637309247422805087&amp;sdata=YkyJLyoppmYkSr7%2BhYuW%2B5%2FL2XSSlNYm2CC1cKWlH64%3D&amp;reserved=0

Reply via email to