[jira] [Commented] (BOOKKEEPER-280) LedgerHandle.addEntry() should return an entryId

["Sijie Guo (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13287129#comment-13287129 ] 

Sijie Guo commented on BOOKKEEPER-280:
--------------------------------------

[~mmerli] the patch seems good to me. only one place, it would be better to change -1 to use a constant define in "long entryId = -1;". The constant define you could refer BOOKKEEPER-260.

But one thing that I concerned is that changing return value breaks binary compatibility (i.e. bytecodes that was previously compiled against the old API will no longer run).
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3589946/retrofitting-void-methods-to-return-its-argument-to-facilitate-fluency-breaking

In order not to block BOOKKEEPER-220, I would suggest you implement sync addEntry based on bookkeeper's asyncAddEntry first to get the entry id.
                
> LedgerHandle.addEntry() should return an entryId
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: BOOKKEEPER-280
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-280
>             Project: Bookkeeper
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: bookkeeper-client
>    Affects Versions: 4.2.0
>            Reporter: Matteo Merli
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 4.2.0
>
>         Attachments: 0001-BOOKKEEPER-280-LedgerHandle.addEntry-should-return-a.patch, 0001-BOOKKEEPER-280-LedgerHandle.addEntry-should-return-a.patch
>
>
> LedgerHandle.asyncAddEntry callback provides the entryId of the newly added entry, but the synchronous version return void. 

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira