+1 (binding) - validated python quickstarts.
Thank you Pablo.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 1:57 PM Pablo Estrada wrote:
> +1 (binding)
> I've built and unit tested existing Dataflow Templates with the new
> version.
> Best
> -P.
>
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:17 PM Pablo Estrada wrote:
>
>> Hi
I added you as a contributor. You can self assign the jira to yourself.
Welcome and thank you for contributing.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 3:22 PM John Edmonds
wrote:
> I'm interested in taking on a small issue I created (
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-11580). Could I have
>
I'm interested in taking on a small issue I created
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-11580). Could I have permission to
assign it to myself?
Thank you all for this productive conversation!
Interestingly enough, a usability study we ran for Apache Beam (more
details coming soon) pointed out that our documentation and website assume
that the readers will be already familiar with Data Processing basic
concepts such as engines, pipelines,
+1 (binding)
I've built and unit tested existing Dataflow Templates with the new version.
Best
-P.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:17 PM Pablo Estrada wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #4 for the version 2.27.0,
> as follows:
> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> [ ]
Thanks for the information. Do we have a jira to track this issue or do you
want me to create a jira for this?
Thanks.
Antonio.
On 2021/01/06 17:59:47, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> Agree with Boyuan & Kyle. That PR is the problem, and we probably do not
> have adequate testing. We have a
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 12:28 PM Robert Burke wrote:
> +1 on consolidating and being consistent with our terms.
>
> I've always considered them (Runner/Engine) synonymous. From a user
> perspective, an engine without a runner isn't any good for their beam
> pipeline. That there's an adapter is an
+1 on consolidating and being consistent with our terms.
I've always considered them (Runner/Engine) synonymous. From a user
perspective, an engine without a runner isn't any good for their beam
pipeline. That there's an adapter is an implementation detail in some
instances. I do appreciate not
+1 to keeping the distinction between Runner and Engine as Kenn described,
and cleaning up the site with these in mind (I don't think the term engine
is widely used yet).
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 11:15 AM Yichi Zhang wrote:
> I agree with what kenn said, in most cases I would refer to the term
>
I agree with what kenn said, in most cases I would refer to the term runner
as the adapter for translating user's pipeline code into a job
representation and submitting it to the execution engine. Though in some
cases they may still be used interchangeably such as direct runner?
On Wed, Jan 6,
+1 to distinguishing between runners and engines(spark/flink/dataflow).
Those terms are clear and make sense to me.
*~Vincent*
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 11:02 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> I personally try to always distinguish two concepts: the thing doing the
> computing (like Spark or Flink),
I personally try to always distinguish two concepts: the thing doing the
computing (like Spark or Flink), and the adapter for running a Beam
pipeline (like SparkRunner or FlinkRunner). I use the term "runner" to mean
the adapter, and have been trying to use the term "engine" to refer to the
thing
Agree with Boyuan & Kyle. That PR is the problem, and we probably do not
have adequate testing. We have a cultural understanding of not breaking
encoded data forms but this is the encoded form of the TypeSerializer, and
actually there are two problems.
1. When you have a serialized object that
Very good questions. Answers inline.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 8:16 AM Agnieszka Sell
wrote:
> Hi Kenneth,
>
> Thank you for your feedback about the Capability Matrix! I have several
> questions about it:
>
> *Feedback: I think we can also remove rows that are not started or not
> complete in the
> Those are good points. Do you know if the Interactive Runner has been tried
> in those instances? If so, what were the shortcomings?
I am not aware of experiences or shortcomings with the Interactive
Runner. The issue is that the Interactive runner is based on python
and all the tools I
Hi Kenneth,
Thank you for your feedback about the Capability Matrix! I have several
questions about it:
*Feedback: I think we can also remove rows that are not started or not
complete in the Beam Model, and remove the Beam Model column.*
Question: If we remove the Beam model column the whole
Sorry for the typo in your name. :-)
On 1/6/21 10:11 AM, Jan Lukavský wrote:
Hi Antonie,
yes, for instance. I'd just like to rule out possibility that a single
DoFn processing multiple partitions (restrictions) brings some
overhead in your case.
Jan
On 12/31/20 10:36 PM, Antonio Si wrote:
Hi Antonie,
yes, for instance. I'd just like to rule out possibility that a single
DoFn processing multiple partitions (restrictions) brings some overhead
in your case.
Jan
On 12/31/20 10:36 PM, Antonio Si wrote:
Hi Jan,
Sorry for the late reply. My topic has 180 partitions. Do you mean
18 matches
Mail list logo
