Hello to all users, contributors and Committers!
[ You are receiving this email as a subscriber to one or more ASF project
dev or user
mailing lists and is not being sent to you directly. It is important that
we reach all of our
users and contributors/committers so that they may get a chance t
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/30760 The PostCommit Pyth
Hey all,
There have been some conversations lately about how best to enable dynamic
destinations in a portable context. Usually, this comes up for
cross-language transforms and more recently for Beam YAML.
I've started a short doc outlining some routes we could take. The purpose
is to establish a
Thanks for putting this together, it will be a really useful feature to
have.
I am in favor of the string-pattern approaches. I think we need to support
both the {record=..., dest_info=...} and the elide-fields approaches, as
the former is nicer when one has a fixed representation for the
output r
This does seem like the best compromise, though I think there will still
end up being performance issues. A common pattern I've seen is that there
is a long common prefix to the dynamic destination followed the dynamic
component. e.g. the destination might be
long/common/path/to/destination/files/.
robertwb commented on PR #662:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/662#issuecomment-2023217884
R: @Abacn
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsub
robertwb opened a new pull request, #662:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/662
This was generated with `python -m apache_beam.yaml.generate_yaml_docs`.
(Adding this to the beam release process is at
https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/30741.)
--
This is an automated me
brucearctor commented on PR #662:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/662#issuecomment-2023233436
I am assuming since auto-generated, what is generated is what we want ...
Didn't verify the `index.html` page.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respo
> This does seem like the best compromise, though I think there will still
end up being performance issues. A common pattern I've seen is that there
is a long common prefix to the dynamic destination followed the dynamic
component. e.g. the destination might be
long/common/path/to/destination/files
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:12 AM Reuven Lax wrote:
> This does seem like the best compromise, though I think there will still
> end up being performance issues. A common pattern I've seen is that there
> is a long common prefix to the dynamic destination followed the dynamic
> component. e.g. the
robertwb commented on PR #662:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/662#issuecomment-2023256794
Thanks.
Yeah, this is mostly a question of placement. (The html generation has been
reviewed in previous PRs.)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To r
robertwb merged PR #662:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/662
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@beam.apache.o
Can the prefix still be generated programmatically at graph creation time?
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:40 AM Robert Bradshaw wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:12 AM Reuven Lax wrote:
>
>> This does seem like the best compromise, though I think there will still
>> end up being performance issues.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 10:20 AM Reuven Lax wrote:
> Can the prefix still be generated programmatically at graph creation time?
>
Yes. It's just a property of the transform passed by the user at
configuration time.
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 9:40 AM Robert Bradshaw
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 27
Hi all,
Beam 2.55 was released with a bug that causes WriteToJson on Beam YAML to
fail when using the Java variant. This also affects any user attempting to
use the Xlang JsonWriteTransformProvider -
https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/sdks/java/io/json/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/
Given the severity of the breakage, and the simplicity of the workaround,
I'm in favor of a patch release. I think we could do Python-only, which
would make the process even more lightweight.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 3:48 PM Jeff Kinard wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Beam 2.55 was released with a bug that
+1 to a targeted patch release.
We did the same for the Go SDK a little while back. It would be good to see
what's different for a different SDK.
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024, 4:01 PM Robert Bradshaw via dev
wrote:
> Given the severity of the breakage, and the simplicity of the workaround,
> I'm in fav
17 matches
Mail list logo
