You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
BigQueryIO currently documents triggering frequency as:
This is only applicable when the write method is set to {@link Method#FILE_LOADS}, and only when writing an unbounded {@link PCollection}.
However, we use triggering frequency for STORAGE_WRITE_API and STORAGE_API_AT_LEAST_ONCE as well. This documentation should be updated to reflect this.
In addition, during the validation component of BigQueryIO.write().expand(), we check for unbounded && (file loads || storage write api) to see if a triggering frequency is set. This should probably also be checked if storage write at least once is set.
@johnjcasey Hi John, I was reading through the guidelines for joining the ASF slack workspace and it looks like non-ASF members (those without an @apache.org address) need to be invited. I was wondering if I could join the workspace. My email is as follows: pothurunikhil@gmail.com
I was going through BigQueryIO. looks like the triggering frequency is actually ignored when the method is STORAGE_API_AT_LEAST_ONCE. So, i do not see any issue
The validation throws the warning that triggering frequency is ignored
Hi, I noticed there is already an open PR (#37205) addressing this issue.
I went through the discussion and would like to help if there are any pending changes or gaps that still need to be addressed. Please let me know if I can contribute.
I was going through BigQueryIO. looks like the triggering frequency is actually ignored when the method is STORAGE_API_AT_LEAST_ONCE. So, i do not see any issue
The validation throws the warning that triggering frequency is ignored
Yes, we can close this issue. I asked AI to cross validate since its been a while
Notes:
STORAGE_API_AT_LEAST_ONCE intentionally does not use triggeringFrequency—it routes to expandInconsistent() which streams writes directly without batching or buffering delay, and BigQueryIO.expand() explicitly disallows/ignores triggering frequency for this method.
The Javadoc update for STORAGE_WRITE_API was already merged in Update triggering frequency doc #30457 (which clarified that withTriggeringFrequency applies to FILE_LOADS and STORAGE_WRITE_API).
Activity
DhirajSardar commentedon Dec 3, 2022
I would like to contribute . Can anyone help me ? I am a newbie.
johnjcasey commentedon Dec 5, 2022
For sure! https://beam.apache.org/contribute/ here is the contribution guide. Take a quick read through that, and then fork the repo to get started
nikhilpothuru commentedon Mar 27, 2023
.take-issue
nikhilpothuru commentedon Mar 27, 2023
@johnjcasey Hi John, I was reading through the guidelines for joining the ASF slack workspace and it looks like non-ASF members (those without an @apache.org address) need to be invited. I was wondering if I could join the workspace. My email is as follows: pothurunikhil@gmail.com
Vivek-2004 commentedon Apr 8, 2023
I want to work on this issue .
11 remaining items
rajkgupt commentedon May 20, 2025
.take-issue
Arunodoy18 commentedon Nov 22, 2025
tarun-google commentedon Dec 12, 2025
I was going through BigQueryIO. looks like the triggering frequency is actually ignored when the method is STORAGE_API_AT_LEAST_ONCE. So, i do not see any issue
beam/sdks/java/io/google-cloud-platform/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/gcp/bigquery/BigQueryIO.java
Line 3762 in 31a96b6
beam/sdks/java/io/google-cloud-platform/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/gcp/bigquery/StorageApiLoads.java
Line 158 in 31a96b6
Vicky-8223 commentedon Dec 31, 2025
I would like to contribute on this issue.I am new contributer and would like to take this up.
.take-issue
shivanshjais22 commentedon Jan 26, 2026
Hi, I’d like to work on this issue. Could you please assign it to me?
KartikeyTripathi469 commentedon Mar 16, 2026
Hello, I would like to work on this issue.
Could you please assign it to me?
Subramanya-Veeregowda commentedon Apr 1, 2026
Hi, I noticed there is already an open PR (#37205) addressing this issue.
I went through the discussion and would like to help if there are any pending changes or gaps that still need to be addressed. Please let me know if I can contribute.
Thanks!
Subramanya-Veeregowda commentedon Apr 18, 2026
Hi, I noticed this issue and PR(#37205 ) has been inactive for a while and has some conflicts.
I’d like to help move this forward. I will open a new one with a minimal fix (only updating the relevant Javadoc)?
@ahmedabu98 if there is any specific requirements then mention it ready to work on it.
ahmedabu98 commentedon May 7, 2026
Hey @Subramanya-Veeregowda, yes that should be enough to get it in!
damccorm commentedon Aug 31, 2026
@tarun-google should the issue be closed then?
tarun-google commentedon Sep 2, 2026
Yes, we can close this issue. I asked AI to cross validate since its been a while
Notes: