Runner Authoring Guide

This guide walks through how to implement a new runner. It is aimed at someone who has a data processing system and wants to use it to execute a Beam pipeline. The guide starts from the basics, to help you evaluate the work ahead. Then the sections become more and more detailed, to be a resource throughout the development of your runner.

Topics covered:

Basics of the Beam model

Suppose you have a data processing engine that can pretty easily process graphs of operations. You want to integrate it with the Beam ecosystem to get access to other languages, great event time processing, and a library of connectors. You need to know the core vocabulary:

These concepts may be very similar to your processing engine’s concepts. Since Beam’s design is for cross-language operation and reusable libraries of transforms, there are some special features worth highlighting.


A pipeline in Beam is a graph of PTransforms operating on PCollections. A pipeline is constructed by a user in their SDK of choice, and makes its way to your runner either via the SDK directly or via the Runner API’s (forthcoming) RPC interfaces.


In Beam, a PTransform can be one of the five primitives or it can be a composite transform encapsulating a subgraph. The primitives are:

When implementing a runner, these are the operations you need to implement. Composite transforms may or may not be important to your runner. If you expose a UI, maintaining some of the composite structure will make the pipeline easier for a user to understand. But the result of processing is not changed.


A PCollection is an unordered bag of elements. Your runner will be responsible for storing these elements. There are some major aspects of a PCollection to note:

Bounded vs Unbounded

A PCollection may be bounded or unbounded.

These derive from the intuitions of batch and stream processing, but the two are unified in Beam and bounded and unbounded PCollections can coexist in the same pipeline. If your runner can only support bounded PCollections, you’ll need to reject pipelines that contain unbounded PCollections. If your runner is only really targeting streams, there are adapters in our support code to convert everything to APIs targeting unbounded data.


Every element in a PCollection has a timestamp associated with it.

When you execute a primitive connector to some storage system, that connector is responsible for providing initial timestamps. Your runner will need to propagate and aggregate timestamps. If the timestamp is not important, as with certain batch processing jobs where elements do not denote events, they will be the minimum representable timestamp, often referred to colloquially as “negative infinity”.


Every PCollection has to have a watermark that estimates how complete the PCollection is.

The watermark is a guess that “we’ll never see an element with an earlier timestamp”. Sources of data are responsible for producing a watermark. Your runner needs to implement watermark propagation as PCollections are processed, merged, and partitioned.

The contents of a PCollection are complete when a watermark advances to “infinity”. In this manner, you may discover that an unbounded PCollection is finite.

Windowed elements

Every element in a PCollection resides in a window. No element resides in multiple windows (two elements can be equal except for their window, but they are not the same).

When elements are read from the outside world they arrive in the global window. When they are written to the outside world, they are effectively placed back into the global window (any writing transform that doesn’t take this perspective probably risks data loss).

A window has a maximum timestamp, and when the watermark exceeds this plus user-specified allowed lateness the window is expired. All data related to an expired window may be discarded at any time.


Every PCollection has a coder, a specification of the binary format of the elements.

In Beam, the user’s pipeline may be written in a language other than the language of the runner. There is no expectation that the runner can actually deserialize user data. So the Beam model operates principally on encoded data - “just bytes”. Each PCollection has a declared encoding for its elements, called a coder. A coder has a URN that identifies the encoding, and may have additional sub-coders (for example, a coder for lists may contain a coder for the elements of the list). Language-specific serialization techniques can, and frequently are used, but there are a few key formats - such as key-value pairs and timestamps - that are common so your runner can understand them.

Windowing Strategy

Every PCollection has a windowing strategy, a specification of essential information for grouping and triggering operations.

The details will be discussed below when we discuss the Window primitive, which sets up the windowing strategy, and GroupByKey primitive, which has behavior governed by the windowing strategy.

User-Defined Functions (UDFs)

Beam has seven varieties of user-defined function (UDF). A Beam pipeline may contain UDFs written in a language other than your runner, or even multiple languages in the same pipeline (see the Runner API) so the definitions are language-independent (see the Fn API).

The UDFs of Beam are:

The various types of user-defined functions will be described further alongside the primitives that use them.


The term “runner” is used for a couple of things. It generally refers to the software that takes a Beam pipeline and executes it somehow. Often, this is the translation code that you write. It usually also includes some customized operators for your data processing engine, and is sometimes used to refer to the full stack.

A runner has just a single method run(Pipeline). From here on, I will often use code font for proper nouns in our APIs, whether or not the identifiers match across all SDKs.

The run(Pipeline) method should be asynchronous and results in a PipelineResult which generally will be a job descriptor for your data processing engine, provides methods for checking its status, canceling it, and waiting for it to terminate.

Implementing the Beam Primitives

Aside from encoding and persisting data - which presumably your engine already does in some way or another - most of what you need to do is implement the Beam primitives. This section provides a detailed look at each primitive, covering what you need to know that might not be obvious and what support code is provided.

The primitives are designed for the benefit of pipeline authors, not runner authors. Each represents a different conceptual mode of operation (external IO, element-wise, grouping, windowing, union) rather than a specific implementation decision. The same primitive may require very different implementation based on how the user instantiates it. For example, a ParDo that uses state or timers may require key partitioning, a GroupByKey with speculative triggering may require a more costly or complex implementation, and Read is completely different for bounded and unbounded data.

What if you haven’t implemented some of these features?

That’s OK! You don’t have to do it all at once, and there may even be features that don’t make sense for your runner to ever support. We maintain a capability matrix on the Beam site so you can tell users what you support. When you receive a Pipeline, you should traverse it and determine whether or not you can execute each DoFn that you find. If you cannot execute some DoFn in the pipeline (or if there is any other requirement that your runner lacks) you should reject the pipeline. In your native environment, this may look like throwing an UnsupportedOperationException. The Runner API RPCs will make this explicit, for cross-language portability.

Implementing the ParDo primitive

The ParDo primitive describes element-wise transformation for a PCollection. ParDo is the most complex primitive, because it is where any per-element processing is described. In addition to very simple operations like standard map or flatMap from functional programming, ParDo also supports multiple outputs, side inputs, initialization, flushing, teardown, and stateful processing.

The UDF that is applied to each element is called a DoFn. The exact APIs for a DoFn can vary per language/SDK but generally follow the same pattern, so we can discuss it with pseudocode. I will also often refer to the Java support code, since I know it and most of our current and future runners are Java-based.


For correctness, a DoFn should represent an element-wise function, but in fact is a long-lived object that processes elements in small groups called bundles.

Your runner decides how many elements, and which elements, to include in a bundle, and can even decide dynamically in the middle of processing that the current bundle has “ended”. How a bundle is processed ties in with the rest of a DoFn’s lifecycle.

It will generally improve throughput to make the largest bundles possible, so that initialization and finalization costs are amortized over many elements. But if your data is arriving as a stream, then you will want to terminate a bundle in order to achieve appropriate latency, so bundles may be just a few elements.

The DoFn Lifecycle

While each language’s SDK is free to make different decisions, the Python and Java SDKs share an API with the following stages of a DoFn’s lifecycle.

However, if you choose to execute a DoFn directly to improve performance or single-language simplicity, then your runner is responsible for implementing the following sequence:


This is a support class that has manifestations in both the Java codebase and the Python codebase.


In Java, the beam-runners-core-java library provides an interface DoFnRunner for bundle processing, with implementations for many situations.

interface DoFnRunner<InputT, OutputT> {
  void startBundle();
  void processElement(WindowedValue<InputT> elem);
  void onTimer(String timerId, BoundedWindow window, Instant timestamp, TimeDomain timeDomain);
  void finishBundle();

There are some implementations and variations of this for different scenarios:

These are all used heavily in implementations of Java runners. Invocations via the Fn API may manifest as another implementation of DoFnRunner even though it will be doing far more than running a DoFn.


See the DoFnRunner pydoc.

Side Inputs

Main design document:

A side input is a global view of a window of a PCollection. This distinguishes it from the main input, which is processed one element at a time. The SDK/user prepares a PCollection adequately, the runner materializes it, and then the runner feeds it to the DoFn. See the

What you will need to implement is to inspect the materialization requested for the side input, and prepare it appropriately, and corresponding interactions when a DoFn reads the side inputs.

The details and available support code vary by language.


If you are using one of the above DoFnRunner classes, then the interface for letting them request side inputs is SideInputReader. It is a simple mapping from side input and window to a value. The DoFnRunner will perform a mapping with the WindowMappingFn to request the appropriate window so you do not worry about invoking this UDF. When using the Fn API, it will be the SDK harness that maps windows as well.

A simple, but not necessarily optimal approach to building a SideInputReader is to use a state backend. In our Java support code, this is called StateInternals and you can build a SideInputHandler that will use your StateInternals to materialize a PCollection into the appropriate side input view and then yield the value when requested for a particular side input and window.

When a side input is needed but the side input has no data associated with it for a given window, elements in that window must be deferred until the side input has some data. The aforementioned PushBackSideInputDoFnRunner is used to implement this.


In Python, SideInputMap maps windows to side input values. The WindowMappingFn manifests as a simple function. See

State and Timers

Main design document:

When ParDo includes state and timers, its execution on your runner is usually very different. See the full details beyond those covered here.

State and timers are partitioned per key and window. You may need or want to explicitly shuffle data to support this.


We provide StatefulDoFnRunner to help with state cleanup. The non-user-facing interface StateInternals is what a runner generally implements, and then the Beam support code can use this to implement user-facing state.

Splittable DoFn

Main design document:

Splittable DoFn is a generalization and combination of ParDo and Read. It is per-element processing where each element the capabilities of being “split” in the same ways as a BoundedSource or UnboundedSource. This enables better performance for use cases such as a PCollection of names of large files where you want to read each of them. Previously they would have to be static data in the pipeline or be read in a non-splittable manner.

This feature is still under development, but likely to become the new primitive for reading. It is best to be aware of it and follow developments.

Implementing the GroupByKey (and window) primitive

The GroupByKey operation (sometimes called GBK for short) groups a PCollection of key-value pairs by key and window, emitting results according to the PCollection’s triggering configuration.

It is quite a bit more elaborate than simply colocating elements with the same key, and uses many fields from the PCollection’s windowing strategy.

Group By Encoded Bytes

For both the key and window, your runner sees them as “just bytes”. So you need to group in a way that is consistent with grouping by those bytes, even if you have some special knowledge of the types involved.

The elements you are processing will be key-value pairs, and you’ll need to extract the keys. For this reason, the format of key-value pairs is standardized and shared across all SDKS. See either KvCoder in Java or TupleCoder in Python for documentation on the binary format.

Window Merging

As well as grouping by key, your runner must group elements by their window. A WindowFn has the option of declaring that it merges windows on a per-key basis. For example, session windows for the same key will be merged if they overlap. So your runner must invoke the merge method of the WindowFn during grouping.

Implementing via GroupByKeyOnly + GroupAlsoByWindow

The Java codebase includes support code for a particularly common way of implement the full GroupByKey operation: first group the keys, and then group by window. For merging windows, this is essentially required, since merging is per key.

Dropping late data

Main design document:

A window is expired in a PCollection if the watermark of the input PCollection has exceeded the end of the window by at least the input PCollection’s allowed lateness.

Data for an expired window can be dropped any time and should be dropped at a GroupByKey. If you are using GroupAlsoByWindow, then just before executing this transform. You may shuffle less data if you drop data prior to GroupByKeyOnly, but should only safely be done for non-merging windows, as a window that appears expired may merge to become not expired.


Main design document:

The input PCollection’s trigger and accumulation mode specify when and how outputs should be emitted from the GroupByKey operation.

In Java, there is a lot of support code for executing triggers in the GroupAlsoByWindow implementations, ReduceFnRunner (legacy name), and TriggerStateMachine, which is an obvious way of implementing all triggers as an event-driven machine over elements and timers.


When an aggregated output is produced from multiple inputs, the GroupByKey operation has to choose a timestamp for the combination. To do so, first the WindowFn has a chance to shift timestamps - this is needed to ensure watermarks do not prevent progress of windows like sliding windows (the details are beyond this doc). Then, the shifted timestamps need to be combined - this is specified by a TimestampCombiner, which can either select the minimum or maximum of its inputs, or just ignore inputs and choose the end of the window.

Implementing the Window primitive

The window primitive applies a WindowFn UDF to place each input element into one or more windows of its output PCollection. Note that the primitive also generally configures other aspects of the windowing strategy for a PCollection, but the fully constructed graph that your runner receive will already have a complete windowing strategy for each PCollection.

To implement this primitive, you need to invoke the provided WindowFn on each element, which will return some set of windows for that element to be a part of in the output PCollection.

Implementation considerations

A “window” is just a second grouping key that has a “maximum timestamp”. It can be any arbitrary user-defined type. The WindowFn provides the coder for the window type.

Beam’s support code provides WindowedValue which is a compressed representation of an element in multiple windows. You may want to do use this, or your own compressed representation. Remember that it simply represents multiple elements at the same time; there is no such thing as an element “in multiple windows”.

For values in the global window, you may want to use an even further compressed representation that doesn’t bother including the window at all.

In the future, this primitive may be retired as it can be implemented as a ParDo if the capabilities of ParDo are enhanced to allow output to new windows.

Implementing the Read primitive

You implement this primitive to read data from an external system. The APIs are carefully crafted to enable efficient parallel execution. Reading from an UnboundedSource is a bit different than reading from a BoundedSource.

Reading from an UnboundedSource

An UnboundedSource is a source of potentially infinite data; you can think of it like a stream. The capabilities are:

An unbounded source has a custom type of checkpoints and an associated coder for serializing them.

Reading from a BoundedSource

A BoundedSource is a source of data that you know is finite, such as a static collection of log files, or a database table. The capabilities are:

The BoundedSource does not report a watermark currently. Most of the time, reading from a bounded source can be parallelized in ways that result in utterly out-of-order data, so a watermark is not terribly useful. Thus the watermark for the output PCollection from a bounded read should remain at the minimum timestamp throughout reading (otherwise data might get dropped) and advance to the maximum timestamp when all data is exhausted.

Implementing the Flatten primitive

This one is easy - take as input a finite set of PCollections and outputs their bag union, keeping windows intact.

For this operation to make sense, it is the SDK’s responsibility to make sure the windowing strategies are compatible.

Also note that there is no requirement that the coders for all the PCollections be the same. If your runner wants to require that (to avoid tedious re-encoding) you have to enforce it yourself. Or you could just implement the fast path as an optimization.

Special mention: the Combine composite

A composite transform that is almost always treated specially by a runner is Combine (per key), which applies an associative and commutative operator to the elements of a PCollection. This composite is not a primitive. It is implemented in terms of ParDo and GroupByKey, so your runner will work without treating it - but it does carry additional information that you probably want to use for optimizations: the associative-commutative operator, known as a CombineFn.

Working with pipelines

When you receive a pipeline from a user, you will need to translate it. This is a tour of the APIs that you’ll use to do it.

Traversing a pipeline

Something you will likely do is to traverse a pipeline, probably to translate it into primitives for your engine. The general pattern is to write a visitor that builds a job specification as it walks the graph of PTransforms.

The entry point for this in Java is Pipeline.traverseTopologically and Pipeline.visit in Python. See the generated documentation for details.

Altering a pipeline

Often, the best way to keep your translator simple will be to alter the pipeline prior to translation. Some alterations you might perform:

The Java SDK and the “runners core construction” library (the artifact is beam-runners-core-construction-java and the namespaces is contain helper code for this sort of work. In Python, support code is still under development.

All pipeline alteration is done via Pipeline.replaceAll(PTransformOverride) method. A PTransformOverride is a pair of a PTransformMatcher to select transforms for replacement and a PTransformOverrideFactory to produce the replacement. All PTransformMatchers that have been needed by runners to date are provided. Examples include: matching a specific class, matching a ParDo where the DoFn uses state or timers, etc.

Testing your runner

The Beam Java SDK and Python SDK have suites of runner validation tests. The configuration may evolve faster than this document, so check the configuration of other Beam runners. But be aware that we have tests and you can use them very easily! To enable these tests in a Java-based runner using Maven, you scan the dependencies of the SDK for tests with the JUnit category ValidatesRunner.

              … misc test options … 

Enable these tests in other languages is unexplored.

Integrating your runner nicely with SDKs

Whether or not your runner is based in the same language as an SDK (such as Java), you will want to provide a shim to invoke it from another SDK if you want the users of that SDK (such as Python) to use it.

Integrating with the Java SDK

Allowing users to pass options to your runner

The mechanism for configuration is PipelineOptions, an interface that works completely differently than normal Java objects. Forget what you know, and follow the rules, and PipelineOptions will treat you well.

You must implement a sub-interface for your runner with getters and setters with matching names, like so:

public interface MyRunnerOptions extends PipelineOptions {
  @Description("The Foo to use with MyRunner")
  public Foo getMyRequiredFoo();
  public void setMyRequiredFoo(Foo newValue);
  @Description("Enable Baz; on by default")
  public Boolean isBazEnabled();
  public void setBazEnabled(Boolean newValue);

You can set up defaults, etc. See the javadoc for details. When your runner is instantiated with a PipelineOptions object, you access your interface by

To make these options available on the command line, you register your options with a PipelineOptionsRegistrar. It is easy if you use @AutoService:

public static class MyOptionsRegistrar implements PipelineOptionsRegistrar {
  public Iterable<Class<? extends PipelineOptions>> getPipelineOptions() {
    return ImmutableList.<Class<? extends PipelineOptions>>of(MyRunnerOptions.class);

Registering your runner with SDKs for command line use

To make your runner available on the command line, you register your options with a PipelineRunnerRegistrar. It is easy if you use @AutoService:

public static class MyRunnerRegistrar implements PipelineRunnerRegistrar {
  public Iterable<Class<? extends PipelineRunner>> getPipelineRunners() {
    return ImmutableList.<Class<? extends PipelineRunner>>of(MyRunner.class);

Integrating with the Python SDK

In the Python SDK the registration of the code is not automatic. So there are few things to keep in mind when creating a new runner.

Any dependencies on packages for the new runner should be options so create a new target in extra_requires in that is needed for the new runner.

All runner code should go in it’s own package in apache_beam/runners directory.

Register the new runner in the create_runner function of so that the partial name is matched with the correct class to be used.

Writing an SDK-independent runner

There are two aspects to making your runner SDK-independent, able to run pipelines written in other languages: The Fn API and the Runner API.

The Fn API

Design documents:

To run a user’s pipeline, you need to be able to invoke their UDFs. The Fn API is an RPC interface for the standard UDFs of Beam, implemented using protocol buffers over gRPC.

The Fn API includes:

You are fully welcome to also use the SDK for your language for utility code, or provide optimized implementations of bundle processing for same-language UDFs.

The Runner API

The Runner API is an SDK-independent schema for a pipeline along with RPC interfaces for launching a pipeline and checking the status of a job. The RPC interfaces are still in development so for now we focus on the SDK-agnostic representation of a pipeline. By examining a pipeline only through Runner API interfaces, you remove your runner’s dependence on the SDK for its language for pipeline analysis and job translation.

To execute such an SDK-independent pipeline, you will need to support the Fn API. UDFs are embedded in the pipeline as a specification of the function (often just opaque serialized bytes for a particular language) plus a specification of an environment that can execute it (essentially a particular SDK). So far, this specification is expected to be a URI for a Docker container hosting the SDK’s Fn API harness.

You are fully welcome to also use the SDK for your language, which may offer useful utility code.

The language-independent definition of a pipeline is described via a protocol buffers schema, covered below for reference. But your runner should not directly manipulate protobuf messages. Instead, the Beam codebase provides utilities for working with pipelines so that you don’t need to be aware of whether or not the pipeline has ever been serialized or transmitted, or what language it may have been written in to begin with.


If your runner is Java-based, the tools to interact with pipelines in an SDK-agnostic manner are in the beam-runners-core-construction-java artifact, in the namespace. The utilities are named consistently, like so:

By inspecting transforms only through these classes, your runner will not depend on the particulars of the Java SDK.

The Runner API protos

The Runner API refers to a specific manifestation of the concepts in the Beam model, as a protocol buffers schema. Even though you should not manipulate these messages directly, it can be helpful to know the canonical data that makes up a pipeline.

Most of the API is exactly the same as the high-level description; you can get started implementing a runner without understanding all the low-level details.

The most important takeaway of the Runner API for you is that it is a language-independent definition of a Beam pipeline. You will probably always interact via a particular SDK’s support code wrapping these definitions with sensible idiomatic APIs, but always be aware that this is the specification and any other data is not necessarily inherent to the pipeline, but may be SDK-specific enrichments (or bugs!).

The UDFs in the pipeline may be written for any Beam SDK, or even multiple in the same pipeline. So this is where we will start, taking a bottom-up approach to understanding the protocol buffers definitions for UDFs before going back to the higher-level, mostly obvious, record definitions.

FunctionSpec proto

The heart of cross-language portability is the FunctionSpec. This is a language-independent specification of a function, in the usual programming sense that includes side effects, etc.

message FunctionSpec {
  string urn;
  google.protobuf.Any parameter;

A FunctionSpec includes a URN identifying the function as well as an arbitrary fixed parameter. For example the (hypothetical) “max” CombineFn might have the URN urn:beam:combinefn:max:0.1 and a parameter that indicates by what comparison to take the max.

For most UDFs in a pipeline constructed using a particular language’s SDK, the URN will indicate that the SDK must interpret it, for example urn:beam:dofn:javasdk:0.1 or urn:beam:dofn:pythonsdk:0.1. The parameter will contain serialized code, such as a Java-serialized DoFn or a Python pickled DoFn.

A FunctionSpec is not only for UDFs. It is just a generic way to name/specify any function. It is also used as the specification for a PTransform. But when used in a PTransform it describes a function from PCollection to PCollection and cannot be specific to an SDK because the runner is in charge of evaluating transforms and producing PCollections.

SdkFunctionSpec proto

When a FunctionSpec represents a UDF, in general only the SDK that serialized it will be guaranteed to understand it. So in that case, it will always come with an environment that can understand and execute the function. This is represented by the SdkFunctionSpec.

message SdkFunctionSpec {
  FunctionSpec spec;
  bytes environment_id;

In the Runner API, many objects are stored by reference. Here in the environment_id is a pointer, local to the pipeline and just made up by the SDK that serialized it, that can be dereferenced to yield the actual environment proto.

Thus far, an environment is expected to be a Docker container specification for an SDK harness that can execute the specified UDF.

Primitive transform payload protos

The payload for the primitive transforms are just proto serializations of their specifications. Rather than reproduce their full code here, I will just highlight the important pieces to show how they fit together.

It is worth emphasizing again that while you probably will not interact directly with these payloads, they are the only data that is inherently part of the transform.

ParDoPayload proto

A ParDo transform carries its DoFn in an SdkFunctionSpec and then provides language-independent specifications for its other features - side inputs, state declarations, timer declarations, etc.

message ParDoPayload {
  SdkFunctionSpec do_fn;
  map<string, SideInput> side_inputs;
  map<string, StateSpec> state_specs;
  map<string, TimerSpec> timer_specs;

ReadPayload proto

A Read transform carries an SdkFunctionSpec for its Source UDF.

message ReadPayload {
  SdkFunctionSpec source;

WindowIntoPayload proto

A Window transform carries an SdkFunctionSpec for its WindowFn UDF. It is part of the Fn API that the runner passes this UDF along and tells the SDK harness to use it to assign windows (as opposed to merging).

message WindowIntoPayload {
  SdkFunctionSpec window_fn;

CombinePayload proto

Combine is not a primitive. But non-primitives are perfectly able to carry additional information for better optimization. The most important thing that a Combine transform carries is the CombineFn in an SdkFunctionSpec record. In order to effectively carry out the optimizations desired, it is also necessary to know the coder for intermediate accumulations, so it also carries a reference to this coder.

message CombinePayload {
  SdkFunctionSpec combine_fn;
  string accumulator_coder_id;

PTransform proto

A PTransform is a function from PCollection to PCollection. This is represented in the proto using a FunctionSpec. Note that this is not an SdkFunctionSpec, since it is the runner that observes these. They will never be passed back to an SDK harness; they do not represent a UDF.

message PTransform {
  FunctionSpec spec;
  repeated string subtransforms;
  // Maps from local string names to PCollection ids
  map<string, bytes> inputs;
  map<string, bytes> outputs;

A PTransform may have subtransforms if it is a composite, in which case the FunctionSpec may be omitted since the subtransforms define its behavior.

The input and output PCollections are unordered and referred to by a local name. The SDK decides what this name is, since it will likely be embedded in serialized UDFs.

PCollection proto

A PCollection just stores a coder, windowing strategy, and whether or not it is bounded.

message PCollection {
  string coder_id;
  IsBounded is_bounded;
  string windowing_strategy_id;

Coder proto

This is a very interesting proto. A coder is a parameterized function that may only be understood by a particular SDK, hence an SdkFunctionSpec, but also may have component coders that fully define it. For example, a ListCoder is only a meta-format, while ListCoder(VarIntCoder) is a fully specified format.

message Coder {
  SdkFunctionSpec spec;
  repeated string component_coder_ids;

The Runner API RPCs

While your language’s SDK will probably insulate you from touching the Runner API protos directly, you may need to implement adapters for your runner, to expose it to another language. So this section covers proto that you will possibly interact with quite directly.

The specific manner in which the existing runner method calls will be expressed as RPCs is not implemented as proto yet. This RPC layer is to enable, for example, building a pipeline using the Python SDK and launching it on a runner that is written in Java. It is expected that a small Python shim will communicate with a Java process or service hosting the Runner API.

The RPCs themselves will necessarily follow the existing APIs of PipelineRunner and PipelineResult, but altered to be the minimal backend channel, versus a rich and convenient API. RPC

This will take the same form, but PipelineOptions will have to be serialized to JSON (or a proto Struct) and passed along.

message RunPipelineRequest {
  Pipeline pipeline;
  Struct pipeline_options;
message RunPipelineResponse {
  bytes pipeline_id;

  // TODO: protocol for rejecting pipelines that cannot be executed
  // by this runner. May just be REJECTED job state with error message.
  // totally opaque to the SDK; for the shim to interpret
  Any contents;

PipelineResult aka “Job API”

The two core pieces of functionality in this API today are getting the state of a job and canceling the job. It is very much likely to evolve, for example to be generalized to support draining a job (stop reading input and let watermarks go to infinity). Today, verifying our test framework benefits (but does not depend upon wholly) querying metrics over this channel.

message CancelPipelineRequest {
  bytes pipeline_id;
message GetStateRequest {
  bytes pipeline_id;
message GetStateResponse {
  JobState state;
enum JobState {