Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BEAM-646] Construct Pipeline Nodes after Pipeline#run #1971

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

tgroh
Copy link
Member

@tgroh tgroh commented Feb 10, 2017

Be sure to do all of the following to help us incorporate your contribution
quickly and easily:

  • Make sure the PR title is formatted like:
    [BEAM-<Jira issue #>] Description of pull request
  • Make sure tests pass via mvn clean verify. (Even better, enable
    Travis-CI on your fork and ensure the whole test matrix passes).
  • Replace <Jira issue #> in the title with the actual Jira issue
    number, if there is one.
  • If this contribution is large, please file an Apache
    Individual Contributor License Agreement.

Before-run is not compatible with Pipeline Surgery

Specifically, before-execution fails because the snapshot that is taken of the Pipeline is before the PipelineRunner replaces all the nodes, and as a result the final graph (after run() and the test complete successfully) has different nodes, even though it is (in terms of pipeline behavior) the same graph. Neither of the TestPipeline Enforcements require a pre-run traversal, so this should not have observable effects outside of surgery.

Before-run is not compatible with Pipeline Surgery
@tgroh
Copy link
Member Author

tgroh commented Feb 10, 2017

R: @staslev

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.01%) to 69.722% when pulling af403d7 on tgroh:test_pipeline_sequencing into b289521 on apache:master.

@asfbot
Copy link

asfbot commented Feb 10, 2017

Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_Java_MavenInstall/7289/
--none--

@staslev
Copy link
Contributor

staslev commented Feb 10, 2017

LGTM.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in b1c1c83 Feb 10, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants