Reuven. I already started review and hope to finish later on today or tomorrow at latest. If you can, it would be good to take a look at Tim's PR that has been opened for longer time.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 6:36 PM Tim Robertson <[email protected]> wrote: > I took a pass at reviewing (non committer). I haven't worked on unbounded > IO so wasn't familiar enough with the timestamp and checkpointing but > otherwise it LGTM in general - thanks John and for applying the minor > suggestions. > > OT: Reuven, if you have time on your hands there is also the KuduIO > awaiting review (https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6021) > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ismael, do you have time for this review? If you're too busy, I can try >> to help review it. >> >> John, unfortunately, as Ismael said, even if we speed up the review the >> 2.6.0 branch has already been cut, and we try and only cherry pick >> important bugfixes. Hopefully the next release will be soon, and it's also >> possible to use the nightly Beam releases in the interim. >> >> Reuven >> >> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:14 AM Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, we can try to speed up the review, but the 2.6.0 branch was >>> already cut and was stabilizing for the last two weeks, so I am not >>> sure it will make it. Next release should be cut shortly hopefully in >>> 3-4 weeks to follow the 6 week release plan. Hope this can work for >>> you. >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 2:13 AM John Rudolf Lewis <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > I created a pr for my SqsIO contribution. I look forward to your >>> comments. >>> > >>> > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6101 >>> > >>> > Any chance this could be a part of the 2.6.0 release? >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:39 AM, John Rudolf Lewis < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Thank you. >>> >> >>> >> I've created a jira ticket to add SQS and have assigned it to myself: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4828 >>> >> >>> >> Modified the documentation to show it as in-progress: >>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/5995 >>> >> >>> >> And will be starting my work here: >>> https://github.com/JohnRudolfLewis/beam/tree/Add-SqsIO >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 1:43 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Agree with Ismaël. >>> >>> >>> >>> I would be more than happy to help on this one (as I contributed on >>> AMQP >>> >>> and JMS IOs ;)). >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> JB >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19/07/2018 10:39, Ismaël Mejía wrote: >>> >>> > Thanks for your interest John, it would be a really nice >>> contribution >>> >>> > to add SQS support. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Some context on the kinesis stuff: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > The reason why kinesis is still in a separate module is more >>> related >>> >>> > to a licensing problem. Kinesis uses some native libraries that are >>> >>> > published under a not 100% apache compatible license and we are not >>> >>> > allowed to shade and republish them but it seems there is a >>> workaround >>> >>> > now, for more details see >>> >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3549 >>> >>> > In any case if to use SQS you only need the Apache licensed aws-sdk >>> >>> > deps it is ok (and a good idea) if you put it in the >>> >>> > amazon-web-services module. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > The kinesis connector is way more complex for multiple reasons, >>> first, >>> >>> > the raw version of the amazon client libraries is not so ‘friendly’ >>> >>> > and the guys who created KinesisIO had to do some workarounds to >>> >>> > provide accurate checkpointing/watermarks. So since SQS is a way >>> >>> > simpler system you should probably be ok basing it in simpler >>> sources >>> >>> > like AMQP or JMS. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > If you feel like to, please create the JIRA and don’t hesitate to >>> ask >>> >>> > questions if you find issues or if you need some review. >>> >>> > >>> >>> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 12:55 AM Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 3:30 PM John Rudolf Lewis < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I need an SQS source for my project that is using beam. A brief >>> search did not turn up any in-progress work in this area. Please point me >>> to the right repo if I missed it. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> To my knowledge there is none and nobody has marked it in >>> progress on https://beam.apache.org/documentation/io/built-in/. It >>> would be good to create a JIRA issue on https://issues.apache.org/ and >>> send a PR to add SQS to the inprogress list referencing your JIRA. I added >>> you as a contributor in JIRA so you should be able to assign yourself to >>> any issues that you create. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Assuming there is no in-progress effort, I would like to >>> contribute an Amazon SQS source. I have a few questions before I begin. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Great, note that this is a good starting point for authoring an >>> IO transform: >>> https://beam.apache.org/documentation/io/authoring-overview/ >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> It seems that the current AWS code is split into two different >>> modules: sdk/java/io/amazon-web-services which contains the S3FileSystem, >>> AwsOptions, etc, and sdk/java/io/kinesis which contains an unbounded source >>> based on a kinesis topic. I'd like to add this source to the >>> amazon-web-services module since I'd like to depend on AwsOptions. Does >>> adding this source to the amazon-web-services module make sense? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Putting it inside of amazon-web-services makes a lot of sense. >>> The Google connectors all live within the one package and there has been >>> discussion to consolidate all the AWS stuff under amazon-web-services. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Also, the kinesis source looks a touch more complex than other >>> sources. Both the JMS and AMQP sources look like better examples to follow. >>> Which existing source would be the best to model this contribution after? >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> Some of it has to do with how many ways a source can be read and >>> how complicated the watermark tracking but it would be best if the IO >>> authors comment on implementation details. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> If anyone has put some thoughts into this, or better yet some >>> code, I'd appreciate hearing from you. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> >>> [email protected] >>> >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> >> >
