You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ignite.apache.org by ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <al...@gmail.com> on 2017/09/15 17:14:12 UTC
HOLE query entry in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
Hi, Ignters!
We have a strange field HOLE in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
which compared to pending events in
CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery#collectEntries. And it is never
equals any entry.
Do we need it ? Or it can be removed.
--
*Best Regards,*
*Kuznetsov Aleksey*
Re: HOLE query entry in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
Posted by Anton Vinogradov <av...@apache.org>.
Nikolay,
Could you please check?
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 1:50 PM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <alkuznetsov.sb@gmail.com
> wrote:
> HOLE was introduced in CacheContinuousQueryHandler.PartitionRecovery.
> Ticket *IGNITE-426 Implemented failover for Continuous query.*
> Then it was refactored in *Continuous queries fixes.*
> After refactoring the variable is never compares to true. Probably, its a
> bug.
>
> сб, 16 сент. 2017 г. в 1:52, Denis Magda <dm...@apache.org>:
>
> > I like the name. "Black holes" pop up first in my head :) The hole can
> > absorb events and confine and digest them for billions of year. Sorry for
> > off topic.
> >
> > —
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 15, 2017, at 10:14 AM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <
> > alkuznetsov.sb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, Ignters!
> > >
> > >
> > > We have a strange field HOLE in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
> > >
> > > which compared to pending events in
> > > CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery#collectEntries. And it is never
> > > equals any entry.
> > >
> > > Do we need it ? Or it can be removed.
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > *Best Regards,*
> > >
> > > *Kuznetsov Aleksey*
> >
> > --
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Kuznetsov Aleksey*
>
Re: HOLE query entry in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
Posted by ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <al...@gmail.com>.
HOLE was introduced in CacheContinuousQueryHandler.PartitionRecovery.
Ticket *IGNITE-426 Implemented failover for Continuous query.*
Then it was refactored in *Continuous queries fixes.*
After refactoring the variable is never compares to true. Probably, its a
bug.
сб, 16 сент. 2017 г. в 1:52, Denis Magda <dm...@apache.org>:
> I like the name. "Black holes" pop up first in my head :) The hole can
> absorb events and confine and digest them for billions of year. Sorry for
> off topic.
>
> —
> Denis
>
>
> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 10:14 AM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <
> alkuznetsov.sb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, Ignters!
> >
> >
> > We have a strange field HOLE in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
> >
> > which compared to pending events in
> > CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery#collectEntries. And it is never
> > equals any entry.
> >
> > Do we need it ? Or it can be removed.
> >
> > --
> >
> > *Best Regards,*
> >
> > *Kuznetsov Aleksey*
>
> --
*Best Regards,*
*Kuznetsov Aleksey*
Re: HOLE query entry in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
Posted by Denis Magda <dm...@apache.org>.
I like the name. "Black holes" pop up first in my head :) The hole can absorb events and confine and digest them for billions of year. Sorry for off topic.
—
Denis
> On Sep 15, 2017, at 10:14 AM, ALEKSEY KUZNETSOV <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, Ignters!
>
>
> We have a strange field HOLE in CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery
>
> which compared to pending events in
> CacheContinuousQueryPartitionRecovery#collectEntries. And it is never
> equals any entry.
>
> Do we need it ? Or it can be removed.
>
> --
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Kuznetsov Aleksey*