Introduce ShardState Enum + Slight Cleanup SnapshotsInProgress#41940
Merged
original-brownbear merged 9 commits intoelastic:masterfrom May 22, 2019
original-brownbear:cleanup-shard-state-enum
Merged
Introduce ShardState Enum + Slight Cleanup SnapshotsInProgress#41940original-brownbear merged 9 commits intoelastic:masterfrom original-brownbear:cleanup-shard-state-enum
original-brownbear merged 9 commits intoelastic:masterfrom
original-brownbear:cleanup-shard-state-enum
Conversation
* Added separate enum for the state of each shard, it was really confusing that we used the same enum for the state of the snapshot overall and the state of each individual shard * relates #40943 (comment) * Moved the contents of the class around a little so fields, constructors and nested classes/enums aren't all over the place especially now that we have yet another nested enum here * Shortened some obvious spots in equals method and saved a few lines via `computeIfAbsent` to make up for adding 50 new lines to this class
original-brownbear
added
>non-issue
:Distributed/Snapshot/Restore
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-distributed |
Contributor
Author
|
Jenkins run elasticsearch-ci/1 |
andrershov
suggested changes
May 9, 2019
Contributor
andrershov
left a comment
andrershov
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather rename this PR to introduce ShardState enum, because it's not so vague as Cleanup SnapshotsInProgress. I think it's ok if computeIfAbsent change will be part of this PR.
| /** | ||
| * Meta data about snapshots that are currently executing | ||
| */ | ||
| public class SnapshotsInProgress extends AbstractNamedDiffable<Custom> implements Custom { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This diff is not readable, can you please move things back in the file. It would be much easier for the reviewers to see what exactly was changed and you won't be displayed in git history as the author for the lines that you have just re-shuffled.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure we can shuffle that later :), reverted that part and fixed PR title.
original-brownbear
changed the title
Contributor
Author
|
Jenkins run elasticsearch-ci/2 |
Contributor
Author
|
@andrershov ping :) (bwc is apparently broken due to the version bumps right now) |
Contributor
Author
|
Jenkins run elasticsearch-ci/1 |
Contributor
Author
|
Jenkins run elasticsearch-ci/bwc |
1 similar comment
Contributor
Author
|
Jenkins run elasticsearch-ci/bwc |
gurkankaymak
pushed a commit
to gurkankaymak/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2019
…ic#41940) * Added separate enum for the state of each shard, it was really confusing that we used the same enum for the state of the snapshot overall and the state of each individual shard * relates elastic#40943 (comment) * Shortened some obvious spots in equals method and saved a few lines via `computeIfAbsent` to make up for adding 50 new lines to this class
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2019
… (#42573) * Added separate enum for the state of each shard, it was really confusing that we used the same enum for the state of the snapshot overall and the state of each individual shard * relates #40943 (comment) * Shortened some obvious spots in equals method and saved a few lines via `computeIfAbsent` to make up for adding 50 new lines to this class
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2020
* Remove Unused Snapshot Status Values This is a left-over from before #41940 when we used the same status enum for the shards and the snapshots overall. The two removed values were never used on the shard level so we can simply remove them here.
original-brownbear
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 7, 2020
* Remove Unused Snapshot Status Values This is a left-over from before #41940 when we used the same status enum for the shards and the snapshots overall. The two removed values were never used on the shard level so we can simply remove them here.
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2020
5 tasks
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2020
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2020
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2020
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2020
mkleen
added a commit
to crate/crate
that referenced
this pull request
May 27, 2020
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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.
confusing that we used the same enum for the state of the snapshot
overall and the state of each individual shard
constructors and nested classes/enums aren't all over the place
especially now that we have yet another nested enum here
via
computeIfAbsentto make up for adding 50 new lines to this class