Improve coder byte calculation methods

[arunpandianp]

• Makes IntervalWindowCoder::isRegisterByteSizeObserverCheap directly return true.
• Add getEncodedElementByteSize to PaneInfoCoder, this avoids having to encode PaneInfo for getting size.
• Add isRegisterByteSizeObserverCheap and registerByteSizeObserver to ValueWithRecordIdCoder

#33578

[arunpandianp]

R: @scwhittle

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @arunpandianp, 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 focuses on enhancing the efficiency of byte size calculation methods within several key Apache Beam coders. By simplifying checks, adding direct size calculation methods, and ensuring proper byte observation, these changes aim to reduce computational overhead and improve performance when dealing with data serialization and sizing in the Beam pipeline.

Highlights

• IntervalWindowCoder optimization: The isRegisterByteSizeObserverCheap method in IntervalWindowCoder now directly returns true, simplifying byte size observation and removing a potentially complex calculation.
• PaneInfoCoder efficiency: A new getEncodedElementByteSize method has been added to PaneInfoCoder to calculate the byte size of PaneInfo elements directly based on their internal encoding, avoiding the need for full encoding for every element.
• ValueWithRecordIdCoder byte observation: The ValueWithRecordIdCoder now includes a registerByteSizeObserver method to accurately observe the byte size of both the wrapped value and its associated record ID, ensuring correct size tracking.

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. ↩

[github-actions]

Stopping reviewer notifications for this pull request: review requested by someone other than the bot, ceding control. If you'd like to restart, comment assign set of reviewers

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 40.33%. Comparing base (c8d7ca0) to head (c603579).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #36830      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     40.33%   40.33%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     3456     3455       -1     
============================================
  Files          1225     1225              
  Lines        187817   187820       +3     
  Branches       3586     3587       +1     
============================================
- Hits          75762    75755       -7     
- Misses       108665   108672       +7     
- Partials       3390     3393       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
java	70.52% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

[sjvanrossum]

Saw this PR while scrolling through the queue and realized that we're missing the branchless method to calculate the length of a varint. See https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/0a2f7757e38b07c2e40c5c885a7100e8c16eb40f/java/core/src/main/java/com/google/protobuf/CodedOutputStream.java#L700 and #36959.

[arunpandianp]

Saw this PR while scrolling through the queue and realized that we're missing the branchless method to calculate the length of a varint.

Thanks! No changes are needed here after #36959.