Conversation
0141de0 to
1db4d04
Compare
162c877 to
912c7b3
Compare
Srb1996
approved these changes
Sep 11, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Changes
isInterruptionException. Swallowing interrupt exception this way is a bad practice, so we can expect this to never happen. At the moment it's too aggressive.Why?
Current implementation can cause data loss. For example, in our environment while loading to Google Cloud Storage we observed the following exception being thrown from time to time:
SocketTimeoutExceptionis a subclass ofInterruptedIOExceptionwhich is caught by theisInterruptionException.This causes the commit to fail, the exception being completely ignored (debug log is the only indication) and loading to continue by skipping the batch completely.