Re: Self-checkpoint Support on Portable Flink

Hi there, I just updated the doc with implementation details and opened PR13105 for review. Thanks for your help! On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 3:40 AM

[GitHub] [beam-site] robinyqiu merged pull request #608: Publish 2.25.0 release

robinyqiu merged pull request #608: URL: https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/608 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

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release 2.25.0, release candidate #2

I'm happy to announce that we have unanimously approved this release. There are 6 approving votes, 3 of which are binding: * Ahmet Altay * Pablo Estrada * Robert Bradshaw There are no disapproving votes. Thanks everyone!

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.25.0, release candidate #2

Hi everyone, we now have 3 +1's from PMC members and no -1. The vote has passed 72 hours and I am closing it now. On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 1:47 PM Robert Bradshaw wrote: > +1 (binding). > > I verified the release artifacts and signatures, and tried a couple of > Python pipelines from an install

Re: [VOTE] Release 2.25.0, release candidate #2

+1 (binding). I verified the release artifacts and signatures, and tried a couple of Python pipelines from an install of a wheel in a fresh virtual environment. All looks good to me. On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 4:54 PM Tyson Hamilton wrote: > > +1 > > I went through the Nexmark queries and

Re: [DISCUSS] Sensible dependency upgrades

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 10:16 AM Luke Cwik wrote: > > An additional thing I forgot to mention was that if we only had portable > runners our BOM story would be simplified since we wouldn't have the runner > on the classpath and users would have a consistent experience across runners > with

Re: [DISCUSS] Sensible dependency upgrades

An additional thing I forgot to mention was that if we only had portable runners our BOM story would be simplified since we wouldn't have the runner on the classpath and users would have a consistent experience across runners with regards to dependency convergence. On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 6:15 AM

Re: Updating elasticsearch version to 7.9.2 - problem with HadoopFormatIOElasticTest that uses ES emulator

I've already found the assumptions, they were in elastic_test_data.py. The relevant PR is at https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/13085 On 2020/10/22 18:15:11, Tyson Hamilton wrote: > IMO it really comes down to stability & runtime differences. If there are > no significant changes to either

Re: [DISCUSS] Sensible dependency upgrades

Thank you for pointing it out. The awareness problem fits me well here - I have a good lesson to discuss things on the devlist. About SolrIO - I'll create a thread on @users to discuss which versions should be supported and make relevant changes after getting a conclusion. On 2020/10/22

Re: Apache Beam case studies

Hi, @Luke thanks a mill for cc'ing Mariann :-) Let's see if there's any interest. Kind regards, Karolina Rosół Polidea | Head of Cloud & OSS M: +48 606 630 236 <+48606630236> E: karolina.ro...@polidea.com [image: Polidea] Check out our