[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-12276?focusedWorklogId=601304&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-601304
]
ASF GitHub Bot logged work on BEAM-12276:
-----------------------------------------
Author: ASF GitHub Bot
Created on: 24/May/21 17:36
Start Date: 24/May/21 17:36
Worklog Time Spent: 10m
Work Description: je-ik commented on pull request #14718:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14718#issuecomment-847215896
If we enforce the use of explicit output timestamp I think that from the
correctness perspective, it really looks like c) is the way to go. I'm still
not convinced we can simply ignore the fact that it is breaking change, though.
Mostly because it is a *runtime* breaking change, that can result in production
downtimes (if a buggy code is not revealed during testing of a pipeline, which
might happen).
--
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
Issue Time Tracking
-------------------
Worklog Id: (was: 601304)
Time Spent: 5h 10m (was: 5h)
> Timer.withOutputTimestamp(Instant).offset(Duration).setRelative() might fail
> unexpectedly
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-12276
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-12276
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: sdk-java-core
> Affects Versions: 2.30.0
> Reporter: Jan Lukavský
> Assignee: Jan Lukavský
> Priority: P2
> Fix For: 2.31.0
>
> Time Spent: 5h 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> We check that timer's output timestamp is not before timer fire timestamp.
> The fire timestamp is unknown to user when setting a relative timer and
> therefore cannot be checked in user code.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
