[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2572?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16086202#comment-16086202
 ] 

Dmitry Demeshchuk commented on BEAM-2572:
-----------------------------------------

Hi Cham,

That sounds good, let's focus on the FileSystem sub-classes; as you said, since 
they get constructed in runtime, they are somewhat special, compared to regular 
PTransforms.

It looks like so far we've been focusing on the implementation side of things: 
using pre-setup environment and/or creating a custom package for passing the 
parameters, passing the parameters to the FileSystem class, etc. What if we 
first try to discuss the user interface first, and then for each option see 
what the implementation would be for each proposed user interface? It will be 
likely that some interface proposals will turn out not be viable due to Beam's 
execution context or stuff like that, but that's fine.

> Implement an S3 filesystem for Python SDK
> -----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-2572
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-2572
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: sdk-py
>            Reporter: Dmitry Demeshchuk
>            Assignee: Ahmet Altay
>            Priority: Minor
>
> There are two paths worth exploring, to my understanding:
> 1. Sticking to the HDFS-based approach (like it's done in Java).
> 2. Using boto/boto3 for accessing S3 through its common API endpoints.
> I personally prefer the second approach, for a few reasons:
> 1. In real life, HDFS and S3 have different consistency guarantees, therefore 
> their behaviors may contradict each other in some edge cases (say, we write 
> something to S3, but it's not immediately accessible for reading from another 
> end).
> 2. There are other AWS-based sources and sinks we may want to create in the 
> future: DynamoDB, Kinesis, SQS, etc.
> 3. boto3 already provides somewhat good logic for basic things like 
> reattempting.
> Whatever path we choose, there's another problem related to this: we 
> currently cannot pass any global settings (say, pipeline options, or just an 
> arbitrary kwarg) to a filesystem. Because of that, we'd have to setup the 
> runner nodes to have AWS keys set up in the environment, which is not trivial 
> to achieve and doesn't look too clean either (I'd rather see one single place 
> for configuring the runner options).
> Also, it's worth mentioning that I already have a janky S3 filesystem 
> implementation that only supports DirectRunner at the moment (because of the 
> previous paragraph). I'm perfectly fine finishing it myself, with some 
> guidance from the maintainers.
> Where should I move on from here, and whose input should I be looking for?
> Thanks!



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to