-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 242
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
fixes #1920 #2049
Open
ivakegg
wants to merge
23
commits into
integration
Choose a base branch
from
bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
base: integration
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
fixes #1920 #2049
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
23 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
431739c
fixes #1920
ivakegg e855207
formatting
ivakegg c22462e
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg dd48968
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 77a195b
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg bfce3f0
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 5aaeac1
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg bbe0978
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg e133d1f
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 61ca815
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 9cc16d8
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg cd96f88
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg a1b7de9
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 1bf0c3d
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg f49f251
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg d686d67
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg ada485a
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 53e80aa
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 70605f1
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 3b478ae
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 3f1fbdb
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 4a8da93
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg 6577e0f
Merge branch 'integration' into bugfix/DATAWAVE-1920
ivakegg File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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.
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'm not sure what this comment has to do with the original issue I reported.
In the scenario I described, one of two things happen.
Either,
complete
file.OR
complete
file.I don't think this has anything to do with the scan threshold. If it did, then in scenario
#1
the code wouldn't persist the buffer to disk, (but it absolutely does!!!). Scenario#1
is not the problem.Scenario
#2
where data has already been written to disk, but there are no results in the in-memory buffer is the problem. We already have data written to disk, but we aren't creating thecomplete
file.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 am pretty sure that "this.set.hasPersistedData()" is the part of the check that takes care of your scenario 2.
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.
@jwomeara are you saying that the code in scenario 2 is not making an accurate determination about the sate of persistence? That it's not enough that the buffer is null to call it "persisted". Should the check be buffer == null && isPersisted instead of an || ? Or am I misunderstanding altogether?