Skip to content

Conversation

@tvalentyn
Copy link
Contributor

This might be a slightly better message that suggests to not pass large elements across a fusion boundary.


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.

@tvalentyn
Copy link
Contributor Author

R: @robertwb

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Stopping reviewer notifications for this pull request: review requested by someone other than the bot, ceding control

'Data output stream buffer size %s exceeds %s bytes. '
'This is likely due to a large element in a PCollection. '
'This is likely caused by a large element in a PCollection '
'that is passed between different fused stages. '
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

might be too dataflow specific. ...that is passed between the SDK and a runner might be better.

@robertwb
Copy link
Contributor

Given that fusion boundaries are an implementation detail outside the users direct control IMHO I don't think it's worth putting that detail here. Better to avoid large elements in general than to try and reason where they may or may not be OK for a particular optimization of a pipeline.

@tvalentyn tvalentyn closed this May 30, 2024
@tvalentyn
Copy link
Contributor Author

makes sense, thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants