Cham, that was one of the options I had mentioned on the PR. The difference
here is that this is a bug fix and existing users could be broken
unknowingly so it might be worthwhile to take that breaking change (and
possibly provide users a way to perform an upgrade using the old
implementation).


On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:33 PM Chamikara Jayalath <[email protected]>
wrote:

> This might break the update compatibility for Dataflow streaming
> pipelines. +Reuven Lax <[email protected]>  +Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]>
>
>
> In other cases, to save update compatibility, we introduced a user option
> that changes the coder only when the user explicitly asks for an updated
> feature that requires the new coder. For example,
> https://github.com/apache/beam/commit/304882caa89afe24150062b959ee915c79e72ab3
>
> Thanks,
> Cham
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 10:00 AM David Janíček <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I've reported an issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10292
>> which is about broken DefaultFilenamePolicy.ParamsCoder behavior.
>> DefaultFilenamePolicy.ParamsCoder loses information whether
>> DefaultFilenamePolicy.Params's baseFilename resource is file or directory
>> on some filesystems, at least on local FS and HDFS.
>>
>> After discussion with @dmvk and @lukecwik, we have agreed that the best
>> solution could be to take the breaking change and use ResourceIdCoder for
>> encoding/decoding DefaultFilenamePolicy.Params's baseFilename, this way the
>> file/directory information is preserved.
>> The solution is implemented in pull request
>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/12050.
>>
>> I'd like to ask if there is a consensus on this breaking change. Is
>> everyone OK with this?
>> Thanks in advance for answers.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> David
>>
>

Reply via email to