Google Dataflow: running dynamic query with BigQuery+Pub/Sub in Python
What I would like to do in the pipeline:
- Read from pub/sub (done)
- Transform this data to dictionary (done)
- Take the value of a specified key from the dict (done)
Run a parametrized/dynamic query from BigQuery in which the where part should be like this:
SELECT field1 FROM Table where field2 = @valueFromP/S
The pipeline
| 'Read from PubSub' >> beam.io.ReadFromPubSub(subscription='')
| 'String to dictionary' >> beam.Map(lambda s:data_ingestion.parse_method(s))
| 'BigQuery' >> <Here is where I'm not sure how to do it>
The normal way to read from BQ it would be like:
| 'Read' >> beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(
query="SELECT field1 FROM table where field2='string'", use_standard_sql=True))
I have read about parameterized queries but i'm not sure if this would work with apache beam.
It could be done using side inputs?
Which would be the best way to do this?
What I've tried:
def parse_methodBQ(input):
query=''SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])'
return query
class ReadFromBigQuery(beam.PTransform):
def expand(self, pcoll):
return (
pcoll
| 'FormatQuery' >> beam.Map(parse_methodBQ)
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(query=s)))
)
with beam.Pipeline(options=pipeline_options) as p:
transform = (p | 'BQ' >> ReadFromBigQuery()
The result (why this?):
<Read(PTransform) label=[Read]>
The correct result should be like:
{u'Field1': u'string', u'Field2': Bool}
THE SOLUTION
In the pipeline:
| 'BQ' >> beam.Map(parse_method_BQ))
The function (using the BigQuery 0.25 API for dataflow)
def parse_method_BQ(input):
client = bigquery.Client()
QUERY = 'SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])
client.use_legacy_sql = False
query_job = client.run_async_query(query=QUERY ,job_name='temp-query-job_{}'.format(uuid.uuid4())) # API request
query_job.begin()
while True:
query_job.reload() # Refreshes the state via a GET request.
if query_job.state == 'DONE':
if query_job.error_result:
raise RuntimeError(query_job.errors)
rows = query_job.results().fetch_data()
for row in rows:
if not (row[0] is None):
return input
time.sleep(1)
python google-bigquery google-cloud-dataflow apache-beam google-cloud-pubsub
add a comment |
What I would like to do in the pipeline:
- Read from pub/sub (done)
- Transform this data to dictionary (done)
- Take the value of a specified key from the dict (done)
Run a parametrized/dynamic query from BigQuery in which the where part should be like this:
SELECT field1 FROM Table where field2 = @valueFromP/S
The pipeline
| 'Read from PubSub' >> beam.io.ReadFromPubSub(subscription='')
| 'String to dictionary' >> beam.Map(lambda s:data_ingestion.parse_method(s))
| 'BigQuery' >> <Here is where I'm not sure how to do it>
The normal way to read from BQ it would be like:
| 'Read' >> beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(
query="SELECT field1 FROM table where field2='string'", use_standard_sql=True))
I have read about parameterized queries but i'm not sure if this would work with apache beam.
It could be done using side inputs?
Which would be the best way to do this?
What I've tried:
def parse_methodBQ(input):
query=''SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])'
return query
class ReadFromBigQuery(beam.PTransform):
def expand(self, pcoll):
return (
pcoll
| 'FormatQuery' >> beam.Map(parse_methodBQ)
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(query=s)))
)
with beam.Pipeline(options=pipeline_options) as p:
transform = (p | 'BQ' >> ReadFromBigQuery()
The result (why this?):
<Read(PTransform) label=[Read]>
The correct result should be like:
{u'Field1': u'string', u'Field2': Bool}
THE SOLUTION
In the pipeline:
| 'BQ' >> beam.Map(parse_method_BQ))
The function (using the BigQuery 0.25 API for dataflow)
def parse_method_BQ(input):
client = bigquery.Client()
QUERY = 'SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])
client.use_legacy_sql = False
query_job = client.run_async_query(query=QUERY ,job_name='temp-query-job_{}'.format(uuid.uuid4())) # API request
query_job.begin()
while True:
query_job.reload() # Refreshes the state via a GET request.
if query_job.state == 'DONE':
if query_job.error_result:
raise RuntimeError(query_job.errors)
rows = query_job.results().fetch_data()
for row in rows:
if not (row[0] is None):
return input
time.sleep(1)
python google-bigquery google-cloud-dataflow apache-beam google-cloud-pubsub
add a comment |
What I would like to do in the pipeline:
- Read from pub/sub (done)
- Transform this data to dictionary (done)
- Take the value of a specified key from the dict (done)
Run a parametrized/dynamic query from BigQuery in which the where part should be like this:
SELECT field1 FROM Table where field2 = @valueFromP/S
The pipeline
| 'Read from PubSub' >> beam.io.ReadFromPubSub(subscription='')
| 'String to dictionary' >> beam.Map(lambda s:data_ingestion.parse_method(s))
| 'BigQuery' >> <Here is where I'm not sure how to do it>
The normal way to read from BQ it would be like:
| 'Read' >> beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(
query="SELECT field1 FROM table where field2='string'", use_standard_sql=True))
I have read about parameterized queries but i'm not sure if this would work with apache beam.
It could be done using side inputs?
Which would be the best way to do this?
What I've tried:
def parse_methodBQ(input):
query=''SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])'
return query
class ReadFromBigQuery(beam.PTransform):
def expand(self, pcoll):
return (
pcoll
| 'FormatQuery' >> beam.Map(parse_methodBQ)
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(query=s)))
)
with beam.Pipeline(options=pipeline_options) as p:
transform = (p | 'BQ' >> ReadFromBigQuery()
The result (why this?):
<Read(PTransform) label=[Read]>
The correct result should be like:
{u'Field1': u'string', u'Field2': Bool}
THE SOLUTION
In the pipeline:
| 'BQ' >> beam.Map(parse_method_BQ))
The function (using the BigQuery 0.25 API for dataflow)
def parse_method_BQ(input):
client = bigquery.Client()
QUERY = 'SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])
client.use_legacy_sql = False
query_job = client.run_async_query(query=QUERY ,job_name='temp-query-job_{}'.format(uuid.uuid4())) # API request
query_job.begin()
while True:
query_job.reload() # Refreshes the state via a GET request.
if query_job.state == 'DONE':
if query_job.error_result:
raise RuntimeError(query_job.errors)
rows = query_job.results().fetch_data()
for row in rows:
if not (row[0] is None):
return input
time.sleep(1)
python google-bigquery google-cloud-dataflow apache-beam google-cloud-pubsub
What I would like to do in the pipeline:
- Read from pub/sub (done)
- Transform this data to dictionary (done)
- Take the value of a specified key from the dict (done)
Run a parametrized/dynamic query from BigQuery in which the where part should be like this:
SELECT field1 FROM Table where field2 = @valueFromP/S
The pipeline
| 'Read from PubSub' >> beam.io.ReadFromPubSub(subscription='')
| 'String to dictionary' >> beam.Map(lambda s:data_ingestion.parse_method(s))
| 'BigQuery' >> <Here is where I'm not sure how to do it>
The normal way to read from BQ it would be like:
| 'Read' >> beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(
query="SELECT field1 FROM table where field2='string'", use_standard_sql=True))
I have read about parameterized queries but i'm not sure if this would work with apache beam.
It could be done using side inputs?
Which would be the best way to do this?
What I've tried:
def parse_methodBQ(input):
query=''SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])'
return query
class ReadFromBigQuery(beam.PTransform):
def expand(self, pcoll):
return (
pcoll
| 'FormatQuery' >> beam.Map(parse_methodBQ)
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: beam.io.Read(beam.io.BigQuerySource(query=s)))
)
with beam.Pipeline(options=pipeline_options) as p:
transform = (p | 'BQ' >> ReadFromBigQuery()
The result (why this?):
<Read(PTransform) label=[Read]>
The correct result should be like:
{u'Field1': u'string', u'Field2': Bool}
THE SOLUTION
In the pipeline:
| 'BQ' >> beam.Map(parse_method_BQ))
The function (using the BigQuery 0.25 API for dataflow)
def parse_method_BQ(input):
client = bigquery.Client()
QUERY = 'SELECT field1 FROM table WHERE field1='%s' AND field2=True' % (input['field1'])
client.use_legacy_sql = False
query_job = client.run_async_query(query=QUERY ,job_name='temp-query-job_{}'.format(uuid.uuid4())) # API request
query_job.begin()
while True:
query_job.reload() # Refreshes the state via a GET request.
if query_job.state == 'DONE':
if query_job.error_result:
raise RuntimeError(query_job.errors)
rows = query_job.results().fetch_data()
for row in rows:
if not (row[0] is None):
return input
time.sleep(1)
python google-bigquery google-cloud-dataflow apache-beam google-cloud-pubsub
python google-bigquery google-cloud-dataflow apache-beam google-cloud-pubsub
edited Nov 22 '18 at 7:19
IoT user
asked Nov 20 '18 at 11:00
IoT userIoT user
13512
13512
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
You can read the whole table or use a string query.
I understand that you will use the parse_methodBQ method to customize the query as needed. As this method returns a query, you can call it with BigQuerySource. The rows are in dictionary.
| 'QueryTable' >> beam.Map(beam.io.BigQuerySource(parse_methodBQ))
# Each row is a dictionary where the keys are the BigQuery columns
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: s['data'])
Further more, you can avoid having to customize the query and use a filter method
Regarding the side inputs, review this example from the cookbook to have a better view on how to use them.
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53391541%2fgoogle-dataflow-running-dynamic-query-with-bigquerypub-sub-in-python%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You can read the whole table or use a string query.
I understand that you will use the parse_methodBQ method to customize the query as needed. As this method returns a query, you can call it with BigQuerySource. The rows are in dictionary.
| 'QueryTable' >> beam.Map(beam.io.BigQuerySource(parse_methodBQ))
# Each row is a dictionary where the keys are the BigQuery columns
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: s['data'])
Further more, you can avoid having to customize the query and use a filter method
Regarding the side inputs, review this example from the cookbook to have a better view on how to use them.
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
add a comment |
You can read the whole table or use a string query.
I understand that you will use the parse_methodBQ method to customize the query as needed. As this method returns a query, you can call it with BigQuerySource. The rows are in dictionary.
| 'QueryTable' >> beam.Map(beam.io.BigQuerySource(parse_methodBQ))
# Each row is a dictionary where the keys are the BigQuery columns
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: s['data'])
Further more, you can avoid having to customize the query and use a filter method
Regarding the side inputs, review this example from the cookbook to have a better view on how to use them.
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
add a comment |
You can read the whole table or use a string query.
I understand that you will use the parse_methodBQ method to customize the query as needed. As this method returns a query, you can call it with BigQuerySource. The rows are in dictionary.
| 'QueryTable' >> beam.Map(beam.io.BigQuerySource(parse_methodBQ))
# Each row is a dictionary where the keys are the BigQuery columns
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: s['data'])
Further more, you can avoid having to customize the query and use a filter method
Regarding the side inputs, review this example from the cookbook to have a better view on how to use them.
You can read the whole table or use a string query.
I understand that you will use the parse_methodBQ method to customize the query as needed. As this method returns a query, you can call it with BigQuerySource. The rows are in dictionary.
| 'QueryTable' >> beam.Map(beam.io.BigQuerySource(parse_methodBQ))
# Each row is a dictionary where the keys are the BigQuery columns
| 'Read' >> beam.Map(lambda s: s['data'])
Further more, you can avoid having to customize the query and use a filter method
Regarding the side inputs, review this example from the cookbook to have a better view on how to use them.
answered Nov 21 '18 at 21:49
Nathan NasserNathan Nasser
4069
4069
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
add a comment |
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Thank for your answer. I did it using beam.Map so it should be like the solution you propose. I will add the solution to the main post.
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 7:15
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Which would be better for max performance: using filter data or using a parse_method like I did?
– IoT user
Nov 22 '18 at 9:41
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
Depending on your use case, if you will you are using multiple custom queries it may be better to have all the table an use a filter but if you are only doing a few custom queries having all the table may be useless.
– Nathan Nasser
Nov 22 '18 at 19:43
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53391541%2fgoogle-dataflow-running-dynamic-query-with-bigquerypub-sub-in-python%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown