[Bug]: LocalSpannerIO package namespace conflict with Beam's SpannerIO

[Abacn]

Related Template(s)

V1

Template Version

N/A

What happened?

V1 templates use LocalSpannerIO under Beam's namespace: https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/DataflowTemplates/tree/main/v1/src/main/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/gcp/spanner and depends on beam-sdks-java-io-google-cloud-platform as well, causing unpredictable class conflict.

It happens in the 2.55.0 release validation: #1361 SpannerIO V1 templates failed with error

Caused by: java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: 'org.apache.beam.sdk.options.ValueProvider org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerConfig.getCredentials()'
	at org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerAccessor.buildSpannerOptions(SpannerAccessor.java:228)
	at org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerAccessor.createAndConnect(SpannerAccessor.java:237)
	at org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.SpannerAccessor.getOrCreate(SpannerAccessor.java:94)
	at org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.spanner.LocalSpannerAccessor.getOrCreate(LocalSpannerAccessor.java:57)
	at com.google.cloud.teleport.templates.common.SpannerConverters$CreateTransactionFnWithTimestamp.setup(SpannerConverters.java:766

because SpannerAccessor was picked from beam-io-gcp but SpannerConfig was picked from v1 at run time, causing NoSuchMethodError.

We should either relocate the namespace of LocalSpannerIO or migrate to Beam's SpannerIO

Relevant log output

No response

[Abacn]

Even removed duplicate classes and only preserve Localxxxx srcs, there are still test failing. Found that compilation of v1/ still generates many AUtoValue_* classes:

Also uploaded a reproduce at https://github.com/Abacn/codesnippets/tree/master/AutoValueTest , this might be an auto value bug

[Abacn]

As a result we cannot partially remove the duplicated sources. We either need to keep sync with Beam or remove them altogether. entered autovalue bug google/auto#1734

[github-actions]

This issue has been marked as stale due to 180 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 1 week if no further activity occurs. If you think that’s incorrect or this pull request requires a review, please simply write any comment. If closed, you can revive the issue at any time. Thank you for your contributions.

[github-actions]

This issue has been closed due to lack of activity. If you think that is incorrect, or the pull request requires review, you can revive the PR at any time.