Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ignore features in FeatureRow if it's not requested in import spec #101

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 24, 2019

Conversation

pradithya
Copy link
Collaborator

Fix #99

@pradithya
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/assign @zhilingc
/assign @tims

@zhilingc
Copy link
Collaborator

/lgtm

thanks for adding the tests :)

@tims
Copy link
Contributor

tims commented Jan 24, 2019

We shouldn't completely ignore them in all these places.

We need errors so that we know what's happening, we don't want to silently discard them.

So what you seem to want is that instead of throwing the whole row into the errors pile, you want to accept as many features as possible and just throw errors for these features.

The only place that needs to do that is the ConvertTypesDoFn. I suggest we should instead emit the row without these suspect features, while also emit an error row (to the errors tag) with just the suspect feature.

If these features proceed past ConvertTypesDoFn, it's a bug, not something we should ignore.

@tims
Copy link
Contributor

tims commented Jan 24, 2019

/hold

@zhilingc
Copy link
Collaborator

The issue is that they're not necessarily errors. We want to be able to selectively ingest features from a given feature row in the streaming case - similar to how we do it in batch.

@pradithya
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I agree, I think we can do it only on ConvertTypesDoFn since it's the most upstream transform.

The only place that needs to do that is the ConvertTypesDoFn. I suggest we should instead emit the row without these suspect features, while also emit an error row (to the errors tag) with just the suspect feature.

Although, I feel emitting error row might not be a good idea since the stream might have a lot of features we are not interested at and it will just flood the error logs.

@feast-ci-bot feast-ci-bot removed the lgtm label Jan 24, 2019
@tims
Copy link
Contributor

tims commented Jan 24, 2019

/approve

@tims
Copy link
Contributor

tims commented Jan 24, 2019

/hold cancel

@zhilingc
Copy link
Collaborator

/approve

@feast-ci-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tims, zhilingc

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@zhilingc
Copy link
Collaborator

/lgtm

@feast-ci-bot feast-ci-bot merged commit 1691a12 into feast-dev:master Jan 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants