chamikaramj commented on a change in pull request #17101:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/17101#discussion_r832449114
##########
File path:
sdks/java/extensions/python/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/extensions/python/ExternalPythonTransform.java
##########
@@ -33,25 +40,169 @@
import org.apache.beam.sdk.values.POutput;
import org.apache.beam.sdk.values.Row;
import org.apache.beam.sdk.values.TupleTag;
+import org.apache.beam.vendor.bytebuddy.v1_11_0.net.bytebuddy.ByteBuddy;
Review comment:
Do you see a downside for this approach ? I would like to use an
existing proven utility here (POJO -> schema) instead trying to recursively and
manually generating the schema here. We could end up doing an implementation
similar to what's already done by POJO -> schema conversion and might be hard
to handle all corner cases that are already handled by existing conversion.
If you don't see a downside can we try to get the API with this
implementation in and look for an alternate implementation later ? (for
example, if the second implementation is more efficient somehow)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
