You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to notifications@geode.apache.org by "pdxrunner (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2018/11/09 19:08:04 UTC

[GitHub] [geode] pdxrunner opened pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

- Add ResultModel parameter
- change from void return to boolean

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache Geode.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:

### For all changes:
- [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the commit message?

- [ ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically `develop`)?

- [ ] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

- [ ] Does `gradlew build` run cleanly?

- [ ] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?

- [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)?

### Note:
Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build issues and
submit an update to your PR as soon as possible. If you need help, please send an
email to dev@geode.apache.org.


[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] jdeppe-pivotal commented on pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "jdeppe-pivotal (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

Hmmm, yes it may well be a premature refactor that we don't really need.

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] pdxrunner commented on pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "pdxrunner (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

Not yet. We wanted to due the refactoring of `updateClusterConfig` as an initial PR. Individual commands will use this as they are refactored to use `SingleGfshCommand`. Initial work on refactoring `AlterAsyncEventQueue` is what prompted this change.

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] jinmeiliao commented on pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "jinmeiliao (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

is this resultModel used in any implementation?

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] pdxrunner commented on issue #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "pdxrunner (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

> @pdxrunner is this PR going to see any more effort or should it be closed?

Thanks for pinging me on this. I should have closed it out when I superseded it with https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2846



[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] pdxrunner commented on pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "pdxrunner (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

The return value is used in  `CommandExecutor.invokeCommand`. Individual command classes that override `updateClusterConfig` will return `true` or `false` to indicate whether the configuration was updated or not (or possibly throw an exception if an error occurred updating the configuration).

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] pdxrunner closed pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "pdxrunner (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

[ pull request closed by pdxrunner ]

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] jinmeiliao commented on pull request #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "jinmeiliao (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

where is the return value used?

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org

[GitHub] [geode] jdeppe-pivotal commented on issue #2825: GEODE-6027: refactor updateClusterConfig

Posted by "jdeppe-pivotal (GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.

@aditya87 @petahhh FYI on this PR
Although it might seem pointless to separate the `ResultModel` and `configObject` as params, my feeling is that these don't belong together and the only reason `RM` contains the `configObject` is because the commands return a `RM`. To that end, I'm also considering having commands return a `Pair<ResultModel, Object>` (http://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-lang/javadocs/api-3.8/index.html?org/apache/commons/lang3/tuple/Pair.html) allowing us to separate the two concerns.  Thoughts? 

[ Full content available at: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2825 ]
This message was relayed via gitbox.apache.org for notifications@geode.apache.org