Reuven - A SchemaProvider makes sense. It's not clear to me, though,
whether that's more limited than a Coder. Do all values of the schema have
to be simple types, or does Beam SQL support nested schemas?

Put another way, would a user be able to create an AutoValue class
comprised of simple types and then use that as a field inside another
AutoValue class? I can see how that's possible with Coders, but not clear
whether that's possible with Row schemas.

On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 8:22 PM Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jeff,
>
> I would suggest a slightly different approach. Instead of generating a
> coder, writing a SchemaProvider that generates a schema for AutoValue. Once
> a PCollection has a schema, a coder is not needed (as Beam knows how to
> encode any type with a schema), and it will work seamlessly with Beam SQL
> (in fact you don't need to write a transform to turn it into a Row if a
> schema is registered).
>
> We already do this for POJOs and basic JavaBeans. I'm happy to help do
> this for AutoValue.
>
> Reuven
>
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2018 at 5:50 AM Jeff Klukas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all - I'm looking for some review and commentary on a proposed design
>> for providing built-in Coders for AutoValue classes. There's existing
>> discussion in BEAM-1891 [0] about using AvroCoder, but that's blocked on
>> incompatibility between AutoValue and Avro's reflection machinery that
>> don't look resolvable.
>>
>> I wrote up a design document [1] that instead proposes using AutoValue's
>> extension API to automatically generate a Coder for each AutoValue class
>> that users generate. A similar technique could be used to generate
>> conversions to and from Row for use with BeamSql.
>>
>> I'd appreciate review of the design and thoughts on whether this seems
>> feasible to support within the Beam codebase. I may be missing a simpler
>> approach.
>>
>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1891
>> [1]
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ucoik4WzUDfilqIz3I1AuMHc1J8DE6iv7gaUCDI42BI/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>

Reply via email to