[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3353?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17179820#comment-17179820
 ] 

Beam JIRA Bot commented on BEAM-3353:
-------------------------------------

This issue is P2 but has been unassigned without any comment for 60 days so it 
has been labeled "stale-P2". If this issue is still affecting you, we care! 
Please comment and remove the label. Otherwise, in 14 days the issue will be 
moved to P3.

Please see https://beam.apache.org/contribute/jira-priorities/ for a detailed 
explanation of what these priorities mean.


> Prohibit stacked GBKs with accumulating mode
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BEAM-3353
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3353
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: sdk-java-core, sdk-py-core
>            Reporter: Eugene Kirpichov
>            Priority: P2
>              Labels: stale-P2
>
> The following test https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/4239 demonstrates that 
> stacked GBKs with accumulating mode are unsafe, the same way that stacked 
> GBKs with merging windows are unsafe.
> In particular, in the pipeline: input -> (gbk onto N keys) -> ungroup -> (gbk 
> onto 1 key) -> ungroup, e.g. suppose the first gbk receives "a" and then "b"; 
> it will emit "a" and then "a","b" - then the second gbk will emit "a" and 
> then "a","a","b" which is meaningless. With combine instead of GBK, it leads 
> to double-counting.
> There are cases where accumulation propagated through stacked aggregation can 
> be desirable, but having it propagate by default is definitely the wrong 
> thing to do. Silently changing it to discarding is likely also the wrong 
> thing to do. So, we should reset the windowing strategy and force the user to 
> specify accumulating mode explicitly if they would like to.
> All pipelines using this currently are computing meaningless results, so 
> rejecting them should not be considered a breaking change. However, we should 
> still find out whether there are a lot of such pipelines or not.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to