gortiz commented on code in PR #14384:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/14384#discussion_r1829029774
##########
pinot-common/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/common/response/broker/BrokerResponseNative.java:
##########
@@ -485,4 +488,15 @@ public Map<String, String> getTraceInfo() {
public void setTraceInfo(Map<String, String> traceInfo) {
_traceInfo = traceInfo;
}
+
+ @Override
+ public void setTablesQueried(@NotNull Set<String> tablesQueried) {
+ _tablesQueried = tablesQueried;
+ }
+
+ @Override
+ @NotNull
Review Comment:
> The choice is between @NotNull or checks for
As Yash also said, that is not correct. It is the opposite. You can assume
nullable things are annotated with `@Nullable`.
> We currently don't have any mechanism to enforce nullability checks (like
https://github.com/uber/NullAway) btw; the annotation is more like a hint to
callers.
I've created a PR in the past trying to use it. The main problem is that we
are breaking the rules very often. https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/13741.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
