[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-8738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17548280#comment-17548280
]
Danny McCormick commented on BEAM-8738:
---------------------------------------
This issue has been migrated to https://github.com/apache/beam/issues/19922
> Revisit timestamp and duration representation
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BEAM-8738
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-8738
> Project: Beam
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: beam-model
> Reporter: Sam Rohde
> Priority: P3
>
> The current proto representation of timesetamp and durations in Beam is
> either raw int64s or the well-known Google protobuf types
> "google.protobuf.timestamp" and "google.protobuf.duration". Apache Beam uses
> int64 MAX and MIN as sentinel values for an +inf watermark and -inf
> watermark. However, the google.protobuf.timestamp is compliant with RFC3339,
> meaning it can only represent date-times between 0001-01-01 and 9999-12-31.
> This is not the same as the int64 MAX and MIN representation. The questions
> remain:
> * What should the timestamp and duration representations be?
> * What units should the timestamps and duration be? Nanos? Micros?
> * What algebra is allowed when dealing with timestamps and durations? What
> is needed?
> See:
> *
> [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c8e7d8dc7d94487fae23fa2b74ee61aec93c94abbcbef3329ffbf3bd@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E]
> *
> [https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/27fe9aa5b33dbee97db1bc924ee410048137e4fe97d9c79d131c010c@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E]
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
