chore: Switch to AvroCoder for Reverse replication template

[manitgupta]

Functional testing

• Happy path code flow from Spanner changestream to source
• Writing and reading from retry DLQ
• Writing to permanent DLQ

Load testing

• Happy path code flow from Spanner changestream to source. Tested for 180 MB/s writes to Spanner with live replication to 12 shards of MySQL.

AvroCoder v/s SerializableCoder

I wrote a benchmark to compare the size and time efficiency of SerializableCoder and AvroCoder at https://github.com/manitgupta/beam-coder-benchmark

AvroCoder is 6x-12x faster on serialization and deserialization respectively, and generates encoded objects that are 8x smaller than SerializableCoder.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @manitgupta, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request initiates a migration within the SpannerToSourceDb template, transitioning the serialization mechanism for TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord from Java's SerializableCoder to Apache Beam's AvroCoder. This change aims to leverage Avro's benefits for data serialization, potentially improving performance and interoperability, and involves updating the TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord class to be Avro-compatible. The PR is currently in draft status for functional testing.

Highlights

• Coder Migration: The primary change involves migrating the serialization mechanism for TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord objects from SerializableCoder to AvroCoder within the SpannerToSourceDb template.
• Avro Integration: The TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord class has been updated to be compatible with AvroCoder, including the addition of @DefaultCoder, @AvroEncode, and @Nullable annotations, as well as a no-argument constructor.
• Code Simplification: Explicit setCoder calls for TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord PCollections have been removed in the main template and test files, as the DefaultCoder annotation now handles this automatically.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 16.66667% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 50.41%. Comparing base (4e8bd77) to head (010c828).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...cloud/teleport/v2/templates/SpannerToSourceDb.java	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #3073   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     50.41%   50.41%           
  Complexity     5022     5022           
=========================================
  Files           970      970           
  Lines         59609    59606    -3     
  Branches       6507     6507           
=========================================
- Hits          30050    30049    -1     
+ Misses        27436    27432    -4     
- Partials       2123     2125    +2     

Components	Coverage Δ
spanner-templates	70.65% <16.66%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
spanner-import-export	68.98% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
spanner-live-forward-migration	80.01% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
spanner-live-reverse-replication	77.50% <16.66%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
spanner-bulk-migration	88.24% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...s/changestream/TrimmedShardedDataChangeRecord.java	83.87% <100.00%> (+0.26%)	⬆️
...cloud/teleport/v2/templates/SpannerToSourceDb.java	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[manitgupta]

The first round of Spanner integration tests had passed, and there was a failure on re-basing. This failure is unrelated to the changes in the PR (CassandraAllDataTypesIT failed and it is a bulk migration template IT)