beam-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas Groh (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (BEAM-2699) AppliedPTransform is used as a key in hashmaps but PTransform is not hashable/equality-comparable
Date Mon, 31 Jul 2017 17:27:00 GMT


Thomas Groh commented on BEAM-2699:

The latter claim is incorrect: two applications of the same transform to the same input will
produce different output (unless the transform's output is a subset of it's input; in which
case the two applications are indistinguishable (same input, same transform, same output),
and reusing the same references cannot be observed. Additionally, applications within a pipeline
are forced to have unique names, so no two transforms will ever incorrectly collide.

The former claim is more worrying; failing to find the same application is a pretty big problem.
Potentially equals/hashCode should be (Name + Pipeline)?

As an aside, PTransforms shouldn't throw an exception if you call equals or hashCode on them,
just return a more-discriminating response.

> AppliedPTransform is used as a key in hashmaps but PTransform is not hashable/equality-comparable
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: BEAM-2699
>                 URL:
>             Project: Beam
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: runner-core
>            Reporter: Eugene Kirpichov
>            Assignee: Thomas Groh
> There's plenty of occurrences in runners-core of Map or BiMap where the key is an AppliedPTransform.
> However, PTransform does not advertise that it is required to implement equals/hashCode,
and some transforms can't do it properly anyway - for example, transforms that capture a ValueProvider
which is also not hashable/eq-comparable. I'm surprised that things aren't already very broken
because of this.
> Fundamentally, I don't see why we should ever compare two PTransform's for equality.
> I looked at the code and wondered "can AppliedPTransform simply be identity-hashable",
but right now the answer is no because we can create an AppliedPTransform for the same transform
applied to the same thing multiple times.
> Fixing that appears to be not very easy, but definitely possible. Ideally TransformHierarchy.Node
would just know its AppliedPTransform, however a Node can be constructed when there's yet
no Pipeline. Suppose there's gotta be some way to propagate a Pipeline into Node.finishSpecifying()
(which should be called exactly once on the Node, and this should be enforced), and have finishSpecifying()
return the AppliedPTransform, and have the caller use that instead of potentially repeatedly
calling .toAppliedPTransform() on the same Node.
> [~kenn] is on vacation but perhaps [~tgroh] can help with this meanwhile?
> CC: [~reuvenlax]

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message