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

Pivotal ID # 181636957: FIRE: Retry File Persistence #564

Merged

Conversation

Juan-EBI
Copy link
Contributor

@Juan-EBI Juan-EBI requested a review from jhoanmanuelms May 17, 2022 18:39
Copy link
Contributor

@jhoanmanuelms jhoanmanuelms left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Please consider my comments


class FireClientFactory private constructor() {
companion object {
fun create(tmpDirPath: String, config: FireConfig): uk.ac.ebi.fire.client.integration.web.FireClient {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand the change from FireOperations to FireClient, it makes a lot of sense now that we'll have multiple clients implementations however, I think we should rename the uk.ac.ebi.fire.client.api.FireClient implementation class so we don't have confusions and we don't need to use full imports in the code.

I think the name we had before, FireWebClient still would make sense or even WebFireClient


@Suppress("TooManyFunctions")
internal class RetryWebClient(
private val fileOperations: FireClient,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it'd be much clearer to call this parameter just fireClient, specially after changing the interface name

password = properties.fire.password
),
RetryConfig(
maxAttempts = 20,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we make these values configurable?

@Juan-EBI Juan-EBI merged commit e039103 into master May 18, 2022
@jhoanmanuelms jhoanmanuelms deleted the feature/pivotal-181636957-FIRE-Retry-File-Persistence branch November 10, 2022 10:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants