[BigQuery] Handle 409 Conflict in BigqueryClient testing client for dataset and table creation

[stankiewicz]

Update the test-specific BigqueryClient to catch GoogleJsonResponseException and treat 409 (ALREADY_EXISTS) as a success during dataset and table creation.

This prevents transient failures where an initial creation request succeeds on the server but the client fails to receive the response. Without this fix, the subsequent retry would fail with a conflict, eventually causing
the test to fail despite the resource being successfully created.

Example test failure - testExactlyOnceWithAutoSchemaUpdate[0] (org.apache.beam.sdk.io.gcp.bigquery.StorageApiSinkSchemaUpdateIT)
https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/38009/checks?check_run_id=69455316406

---

Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:

• Mention the appropriate issue in your description (for example: addresses #123), if applicable. This will automatically add a link to the pull request in the issue. If you would like the issue to automatically close on merging the pull request, comment fixes #<ISSUE NUMBER> instead.
• Update CHANGES.md with noteworthy changes.
• If this contribution is large, please file an Apache Individual Contributor License Agreement.

See the Contributor Guide for more tips on how to make review process smoother.

To check the build health, please visit https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/BUILD_STATUS.md

GitHub Actions Tests Status (on master branch)

See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI or the workflows README to see a list of phrases to trigger workflows.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, 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 improves the robustness of the test-specific BigqueryClient by gracefully handling 409 Conflict errors. By treating these errors as successful operations, the client avoids unnecessary test failures that occur when a resource is successfully created but the initial confirmation response is lost, leading to failed retries.

Highlights

• Error Handling Improvement: Updated the test-specific BigqueryClient to explicitly catch GoogleJsonResponseException during dataset and table creation.
• Conflict Resolution: Implemented logic to treat 409 (ALREADY_EXISTS) status codes as a success, preventing transient test failures caused by retries on already created resources.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

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.

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. ↩

[stankiewicz]

/gemini review

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates BigqueryClient.java to handle GoogleJsonResponseException with a 409 status code (Conflict) during dataset and table creation, allowing the operations to be treated as successful if the resource already exists. Feedback was provided to improve the logging in createNewTable by using explicit identifiers from the request parameters instead of newTable.getId(), which is likely to be null in a conflict scenario.

[github-actions]

Checks are failing. Will not request review until checks are succeeding. If you'd like to override that behavior, comment assign set of reviewers

[stankiewicz]

Run Java_GCP_IO_Direct PreCommit

[stankiewicz]

assign set of reviewers

[github-actions]

Assigning reviewers:

R: @chamikaramj for label java.

Note: If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer.

Available commands:

• stop reviewer notifications - opt out of the automated review tooling
• remind me after tests pass - tag the comment author after tests pass
• waiting on author - shift the attention set back to the author (any comment or push by the author will return the attention set to the reviewers)

The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments).

[stankiewicz]

there was oom in IT test, looking if it is related

[Abacn]

initial creation request succeeds on the server but the client fails to receive the response.

Does the error happens purely in test fixture classes? If so LGTM otherwise we should fix the main source code if this could happen in real pipelines

[stankiewicz]

initial creation request succeeds on the server but the client fails to receive the response.

Does the error happens purely in test fixture classes? If so LGTM otherwise we should fix the main source code if this could happen in real pipelines

this is client used only in testing.