-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
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
Fix for increased FAILED_PRECONDITION errors in BQ Read API. #21739
Conversation
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
1 similar comment
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
R: @chamikaramj, @pabloem |
cc: @TheNeuralBit |
@@ -355,6 +356,7 @@ public synchronized BigQueryStorageStreamSource<T> getCurrentSource() { | |||
.build(), | |||
source.readSession.getTable()); | |||
newResponseIterator = newResponseStream.iterator(); | |||
newResponseIterator.hasNext(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably let's add a comment here describing why this call is important. For someone who doesn't understand the details regarding the BQ API, it's just an ignored hasNext call which might be removed in the future cleanups.
Also, does this points to an issue with the API ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added a comment.
I don't think this indicates an issue with the API per se. We could probably try and read from the stream more explicitly in case that is clearer but the comment also points out why this important now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it be feasible to add a test that exercises this behavior?
Run Java PreCommit |
/cc @pabloem - Could you please include this in the next release cut? @vachan-shetty - if this is not merged in the next day or so, could you please create a release blocking github issue to make sure that this change makes to the next release. |
LGTM. Thanks. |
This line was erroneously removed in #16231.
This line triggers the
FAILED_PRECONDITION
checks that are used to figure out if asplitAtFraction()
call was successful.Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:
R: @username
).CHANGES.md
with noteworthy changes.See the Contributor Guide for more tips on how to make review process smoother.
To check the build health, please visit https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/BUILD_STATUS.md
GitHub Actions Tests Status (on master branch)
See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI.