Adds fields to ProcessBundleRequest

[wolfchris-google]

Adds fields to ProcessBundleRequest. These fields will be used to disable SDK fetching and writing state.

Please add a meaningful description for your change here

---

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 @wolfchris-google, 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 extends the ProcessBundleRequest protocol buffer message by introducing two new fields. The primary purpose of these additions is to provide finer-grained control over state management within the SDK, allowing for the explicit disabling of state fetching and writing operations when they are unnecessary. This enhancement aims to improve efficiency by reducing overhead in specific processing scenarios.

Highlights

• ProcessBundleRequest Extension: Two new boolean fields, key_has_no_state and only_bundle_for_key, have been added to the ProcessBundleRequest message in beam_fn_api.proto.
• State Management Optimization: These new fields enable the SDK to conditionally skip state fetching and writing, respectively, which can optimize performance in scenarios where state operations are not required.

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. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 40.21%. Comparing base (6dedf8f) to head (2b09496).
⚠️ Report is 76 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #36683      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     40.21%   40.21%   -0.01%     
  Complexity     3394     3394              
============================================
  Files          1222     1221       -1     
  Lines        186913   186909       -4     
  Branches       3545     3545              
============================================
- Hits          75174    75172       -2     
+ Misses       108367   108365       -2     
  Partials       3372     3372              

Flag	Coverage Δ
python	40.51% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️

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.

[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

[ryan-mbuashundip]

LGTM according to what's been discussed. Final chance to bikeshed on field names if anyone is so inclined.

[wolfchris-google]

R: @kennknowles please take a look when you get a chance!

[kennknowles]

There's a lot in this PR that does not appear to be intended. Perhaps you could rebase against the master branch and force push to your branch, so that it would show only the relevant commit(s)