[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10233?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17508325#comment-17508325
]
Beam JIRA Bot commented on BEAM-10233:
--------------------------------------
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.
> Return error message/information with existing FAILED_ROW data from
> BigQueryWriteFn (Python SDK)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-10233
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-10233
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: io-py-gcp
> Reporter: Tom Hardman
> Priority: P2
> Labels: stale-P2
>
> A user may call `apache_beam.io.gcp.bigquery.WriteToBigQuery` to write their
> streamed data to BQ. If any rows fail to write, this will return a tagged
> pcollection `BigQueryWriteFn.FAILED_ROWS`. This data includes a tuple
> `(destination_table, failed_row_payload)`.
> My suggestion is to include the error information in the `FAILED_ROWS`
> pcollection. From the source code we can see that we have access to the error
> information, e.g. that the row failed because field `id` was `invalid`
> because `this field is not a record`. I think we should surface this to the
> user.
> I'm happy to open a PR for this myself (as I've already had to overwrite the
> original code in several projects), but it looks like we'd need a breaking
> change by either extending the tuple which would cause unpacking issues in
> existing code, or by returning a different data structure entirely.
>
> Relevant owners:
> [~altay]
> [[email protected]]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
