Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HPCC-23191 Remove @count from logical file Protect status #13202

Conversation

jakesmith
Copy link
Member

@jakesmith jakesmith commented Dec 4, 2019

Signed-off-by: Jake Smith jake.smith@lexisnexisrisk.com

Type of change:

  • This change is a bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
  • This change is a new feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
  • This change improves the code (refactor or other change that does not change the functionality)
  • This change fixes warnings (the fix does not alter the functionality or the generated code)
  • This change is a breaking change (fix or feature that will cause existing behavior to change).
  • This change alters the query API (existing queries will have to be recompiled)

Checklist:

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
    • My code does not create any new warnings from compiler, build system, or lint.
  • The commit message is properly formatted and free of typos.
    • The commit message title makes sense in a changelog, by itself.
    • The commit is signed.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
    • I have updated the documentation accordingly, or...
    • I have created a JIRA ticket to update the documentation.
    • Any new interfaces or exported functions are appropriately commented.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTORS document.
  • The change has been fully tested:
    • I have added tests to cover my changes.
    • All new and existing tests passed.
    • I have checked that this change does not introduce memory leaks.
    • I have used Valgrind or similar tools to check for potential issues.
  • I have given due consideration to all of the following potential concerns:
    • Scalability
    • Performance
    • Security
    • Thread-safety
    • Premature optimization
    • Existing deployed queries will not be broken
    • This change fixes the problem, not just the symptom
    • The target branch of this pull request is appropriate for such a change.
  • There are no similar instances of the same problem that should be addressed
    • I have addressed them here
    • I have raised JIRA issues to address them separately
  • This is a user interface / front-end modification
    • I have tested my changes in multiple modern browsers
    • The component(s) render as expected

Smoketest:

  • Send notifications about my Pull Request position in Smoketest queue.
  • Test my draft Pull Request.

Testing:

@hpcc-jirabot
Copy link

@jakesmith jakesmith marked this pull request as ready for review December 4, 2019 18:03
@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@wangkx - please review, any implications of the ecm change?

Copy link
Member

@wangkx wangkx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jakesmith 2 comments

@@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ ESPStruct [nil_remove] DFUFilePartsOnCluster
ESPStruct [nil_remove] DFUFileProtect
{
string Owner;
int Count;
[depr_ver("1.53")] int Count;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should be [depr_ver("1.54")]. The depr_ver means 'not used from this version on'.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok will fix.

Owned<IEspDFUFileProtect> protect= createDFUFileProtect();
if(owner && *owner)
protect->setOwner(owner);
if(modified && *modified)
protect->setModified(modified);
protect->setCount(count);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if (version < 1.54)
protect->setCount(tree.getPropInt("@count", 0));

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think should probably be:

if (version < 1.54)
    protect->setCount(1);

.. since it didn't have any sensible meaning when it was >1 before, and had to be >=1 if present at all.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK for me.

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@wangkx - please see changes

Copy link
Member

@wangkx wangkx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jakesmith the changes look fine.

@jakesmith jakesmith force-pushed the hpcc-23191-remove-protect-count branch from e7f2ae0 to 888ad66 Compare December 6, 2019 19:54
Signed-off-by: Jake Smith <jake.smith@lexisnexisrisk.com>
@jakesmith jakesmith force-pushed the hpcc-23191-remove-protect-count branch from 888ad66 to 95864de Compare December 6, 2019 20:23
@jakesmith jakesmith changed the title HPCC-23191 Remote @count from logical file Protect status HPCC-23191 Remove @count from logical file Protect status Dec 6, 2019
@HPCCSmoketest
Copy link
Contributor

Automated Smoketest: ✅
OS: centos 7.6.1810 (Linux 3.10.0-327.28.3.el7.x86_64)
GCC:gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180303 (Red Hat 7.3.1-5)
Sha: 95864de
Build: success
Build: success
Install HPCC Platform
HPCC Start: OK

Unit tests result:

Test total passed failed errors timeout elaps
unittest 116 116 0 0 0 36 sec
wutoolTest(Dali) 19 19 0 0 0 2 sec
wutoolTest(Cassandra) 19 19 0 0 0 8 sec

Regression test result:

phase total pass fail elaps
setup (hthor) 11 11 0 26 sec (00:00:26)
setup (thor) 11 11 0 43 sec (00:00:43)
setup (roxie) 11 11 0 19 sec (00:00:19)
test (hthor) 866 866 0 209 sec (00:03:29)
test (thor) 801 801 0 721 sec (00:12:01)
test (roxie) 943 943 0 259 sec (00:04:19)

HPCC Stop: OK
Time stats:

Prep time Build time Package time Install time Start time Test time Stop time Summary
32 sec (00:00:32) 263 sec (00:04:23) 0 sec (00:00:00) 3 sec (00:00:03) 21 sec (00:00:21) 1501 sec (00:25:01) 21 sec (00:00:21) 1841 sec (00:30:41)

@jakesmith
Copy link
Member Author

@richardkchapman - please merge.

@richardkchapman richardkchapman merged commit 9685f9c into hpcc-systems:candidate-7.6.x Dec 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
5 participants