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

Add option to disable validation of cloud bigtable change stream IO #31376

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 28, 2024

Conversation

tonytanger
Copy link
Contributor

@tonytanger tonytanger commented May 22, 2024

fixes #31360 Add withoutValidation option to Bigtable change stream IO.

This aligns with withoutValidation of Read and Write IO. This allows users to create a pipeline without validating the correctness of the change stream configurations. This includes validating the change stream table exists, metadata table exists, metadata table is using the correct schema, and app profile used is appropriate. This allows the users to create a pipeline without Bigtable permissions locally. Bigtable permissions is still required by the pipeline itself in order to stream the table.


Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

  • Mention the appropriate issue in your description (for example: addresses #123), if applicable. This will automatically add a link to the pull request in the issue. If you would like the issue to automatically close on merging the pull request, comment fixes #<ISSUE NUMBER> instead.
  • Update CHANGES.md with noteworthy changes.
  • If this contribution is large, please file an Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement.

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)

Build python source distribution and wheels
Python tests
Java tests
Go tests

See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI or the workflows README to see a list of phrases to trigger workflows.

Change-Id: I0ca42df2f6d8dfe9cd1eaac7208c77fa8d213c4b
Change-Id: I4b7f060381d3402a62a1e68045e1d3b7f1f50a9b
@tonytanger tonytanger marked this pull request as ready for review May 23, 2024 15:16
@tonytanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jackdingilian for Bigtable review.

@svetakvsundhar svetakvsundhar self-assigned this May 23, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@svetakvsundhar svetakvsundhar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, are you able to add unit tests to test this functionality? I was thinking something mirroring how its done here, but maybe just creating a new test file under changestreams will suffice.

Copy link
Contributor

Assigning reviewers. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @m-trieu for label java.
R: @johnjcasey for label io.
R: @igorbernstein2 for label bigtable.

Available commands:

  • stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
  • remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
  • waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments).

Change-Id: I4b47693f7bdc83b116b0b3aea9cdc2cd77f15bc4
@tonytanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

I added some unit tests for the ReadChangeStream config.

Copy link
Contributor

@svetakvsundhar svetakvsundhar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, I'd recommend adding an integration test with this as a follow up.

Happy to merge after a BigTable review

Change-Id: I8f341d36e78f5b737741afa4dfa899884b3c9387
@tonytanger
Copy link
Contributor Author

@svetakvsundhar we're ready to merge. Thanks.

@svetakvsundhar
Copy link
Contributor

Sounds good. Will merge after CI completes! Thanks for the quick turnaround!

@svetakvsundhar
Copy link
Contributor

Note: The failures are unrelated to this change. Going to merge.

@svetakvsundhar svetakvsundhar merged commit 944273f into apache:master May 28, 2024
16 of 18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Feature Request]: Add withoutValidation option added to BigtableIO.ReadChangeStream
3 participants