SAMZA-2301: Add non-null checks in JobModel read control-flow in standalone.#1139
SAMZA-2301: Add non-null checks in JobModel read control-flow in standalone.#1139shanthoosh wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
| for (TaskModel taskModel : containerModel.getTasks().values()) { | ||
| taskToProcessorId.put(taskModel.getTaskName(), containerModel.getId()); | ||
| for (SystemStreamPartition partition : taskModel.getSystemStreamPartitions()) { | ||
| taskToSSPs.computeIfAbsent(taskModel.getTaskName(), k -> new ArrayList<>()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can replace with
taskToSSPs.putIfAbsent(taskModel.getTaskName(), new ArrayList<>()); ?
rmatharu-zz
left a comment
rmatharu-zz
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
one minor comment, feel free to fix and commit
| LOG.info("pid=" + processorId + ": new JobModel is available. Version =" + jobModelVersion + "; JobModel = " + newJobModel); | ||
|
|
||
| if (!newJobModel.getContainers().containsKey(processorId)) { | ||
| if (newJobModel != null && !newJobModel.getContainers().containsKey(processorId)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Until this change, the else code path corresponds to the case where the processor is ensured to be part of the new job model generated. However, with this change, we blur the distinction between processor being part of the job model vs job model unavailable.
I suppose the by product of that is you can potentially have a stream processor running that is not part of the quorum or doesn't have any work to do.
If that is intended, please add a comment and link the existing ticket.
|
@shanthoosh Is this ready to be merged? |
Replace ConfigBasedUDFResolver with the UDF resolver based on the reflections.
|
Yes, @prateekm . This branch had a bunch of conflicts since it was open for a long period of time. Tried resolving them, but it kind of pulled in unrelated changes. Will open a new request in the future with the merge-conflicts resolved. |
4 participants
No description provided.