Fix trigger example write append

[RushabhRatnaparkhi]

Fixes #18767

The TriggerExample runs multiple pipelines that write to the same BigQuery table.
The default WRITE_EMPTY disposition causes the example to fail on Dataflow after
the first pipeline creates the table.

This change explicitly sets WRITE_APPEND so all trigger pipelines can write
successfully to the same table.

---

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 (ICLA).

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 @RushabhRatnaparkhi, 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 resolves an issue in the TriggerExample where multiple pipelines attempting to write to the same BigQuery table would encounter failures after the initial table creation. By configuring the BigQuery sink to use WRITE_APPEND disposition, all subsequent writes are now correctly handled, ensuring the example's robust execution, particularly within Dataflow environments.

Highlights

• BigQuery Write Disposition: Explicitly set BigQueryIO.Write.WriteDisposition.WRITE_APPEND for BigQuery writes in the TriggerExample to resolve failures when multiple pipelines attempt to write to the same table.

🧠 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.

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. ↩

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR fixes a BigQuery write failure in the TriggerExample cookbook example when running on Dataflow. The example runs four separate pipelines with different trigger configurations that all write to the same BigQuery table. Previously, the default WRITE_EMPTY disposition caused failures after the first pipeline created the table.

Changes:

• Added explicit WRITE_APPEND write disposition to the BigQuery write operation in TriggerExample

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[Copilot]

The indentation for the BigQueryIO builder chain is inconsistent with other examples in the codebase. Most other examples (like AutoComplete.java:513-520, CombinePerKeyExamples.java:197-201, WriteToBigQuery.java:129-134) use 4-space indentation for chained methods, but this code uses a larger indentation (10 spaces). Consider adjusting the indentation to match the established pattern in the codebase, aligning the chained methods at 4 spaces relative to the method call context.

[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).

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @chamikaramj

[github-actions]

Assigning new set of reviewers because Pr has gone too long without review. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @Abacn for label java.

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)

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @Abacn

[github-actions]

Assigning new set of reviewers because Pr has gone too long without review. If you would like to opt out of this review, comment assign to next reviewer:

R: @kennknowles for label java.

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)

[kennknowles]

Thanks for contributing! I just commented on the bug - actually I think the problem here is the test set up, not the examples. They should be able to write to separate tables by generating separate table names in the test set up. Changing them to "append" will make the different tests write to the same place in a way that we probably don't want.

[github-actions]

Reminder, please take a look at this pr: @kennknowles

[kennknowles]

waiting on author