Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
issue 2283 - eliminate redundant reads during ingestion #2426
issue 2283 - eliminate redundant reads during ingestion #2426
Changes from 1 commit
36b217a
c7fcd55
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The boolean is already going to be false by default, but I guess it doesn't hurt to do this for clarity (same on line 415) along with the comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, i actually prefer explicitly initializing it (even though it is redundant)...just one less thing to remember :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually it's not initialized on purpose:
I do this intentionally to make sure I set it in each of the if/then/else paths. If I miss a path, the compiler will catch it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that is true for Boolean fields, but is it true for booleans?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Default is false if it's a member of the class. But for local variables in the method, default is unassigned (Eclipse will complain too if you try to use it without assigning a value).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we still need to pass
includeDeleted
now that we have theisDeleted
marker in the response?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be possible to refactor the entire handling of deleted status, but this is a much bigger task. Currently the persistence layer will throw an exception to signal the resource has been deleted. Handling this without using an exception is non-trivial.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
but only conditionally, based on this flag.
I guess was was hoping we could maybe get away with only breaking this method signature once and remove
includeDeleted
now. I'm fine with saving that for "future work" and I agree its probably not a priority.