beam-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dmitry Demeshchuk (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (BEAM-2572) Implement an S3 filesystem for Python SDK
Date Mon, 10 Jul 2017 23:58:00 GMT


Dmitry Demeshchuk commented on BEAM-2572:

How about the following plan, then?

1. Add an ability to hide pipeline options. For example, extend {{_BeamArgumentParser}} by
overloading the {{add_argument}} method, adding a {{hidden=False}} parameter there.
2. Add an {{AWSOptions}} class that inherits from {{PipelineOptions}} and provides hidden
options {{aws_access_key_id}}, {{aws_secret_access_key}} and {{aws_default_region}}.
3. Add an AWS extra package to {{apache_beam}} (similar to {{apache_beam[gcp]}}), which depends
on boto and contains all the AWS-related code.
4. Add an ability for filesystems to be aware of the pipeline options.
5. Add the actual S3 filesystem.

I can make the corresponding tickets and start working on them.

> Implement an S3 filesystem for Python SDK
> -----------------------------------------
>                 Key: BEAM-2572
>                 URL:
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: sdk-py
>            Reporter: Dmitry Demeshchuk
>            Assignee: Ahmet Altay
>            Priority: Minor
> There are two paths worth exploring, to my understanding:
> 1. Sticking to the HDFS-based approach (like it's done in Java).
> 2. Using boto/boto3 for accessing S3 through its common API endpoints.
> I personally prefer the second approach, for a few reasons:
> 1. In real life, HDFS and S3 have different consistency guarantees, therefore their behaviors
may contradict each other in some edge cases (say, we write something to S3, but it's not
immediately accessible for reading from another end).
> 2. There are other AWS-based sources and sinks we may want to create in the future: DynamoDB,
Kinesis, SQS, etc.
> 3. boto3 already provides somewhat good logic for basic things like reattempting.
> Whatever path we choose, there's another problem related to this: we currently cannot
pass any global settings (say, pipeline options, or just an arbitrary kwarg) to a filesystem.
Because of that, we'd have to setup the runner nodes to have AWS keys set up in the environment,
which is not trivial to achieve and doesn't look too clean either (I'd rather see one single
place for configuring the runner options).
> Also, it's worth mentioning that I already have a janky S3 filesystem implementation
that only supports DirectRunner at the moment (because of the previous paragraph). I'm perfectly
fine finishing it myself, with some guidance from the maintainers.
> Where should I move on from here, and whose input should I be looking for?
> Thanks!

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message