Github user ctubbsii commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/209#discussion_r98489892
--- Diff: fate/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/fate/AdminUtil.java ---
@@ -110,25 +110,36 @@ public String getTop() {
public static class FateStatus {
private final List<TransactionStatus> transactions;
- private final Map<Long,List<String>> danglingHeldLocks;
- private final Map<Long,List<String>> danglingWaitingLocks;
+ private final Map<String,List<String>> danglingHeldLocks;
+ private final Map<String,List<String>> danglingWaitingLocks;
+
+ private static Map<String,List<String>> convert(Map<Long,List<String>>
danglocks) {
+ if (danglocks.isEmpty()) {
+ return Collections.emptyMap();
+ }
+
+ Map<String,List<String>> ret = new HashMap<>();
+ for (Entry<Long,List<String>> entry : danglocks.entrySet()) {
+ ret.put(String.format("%016x", entry.getKey()),
Collections.unmodifiableList(entry.getValue()));
--- End diff --
That's fine. This is more clear in the previous code when the formatting
was in the log message. As a private utility method, it's far less clear how
the formatting is used, or why it matters. It's not clear, for example, that
this is just pre-formatting the object for future logging. The method is making
assumptions about the caller's behavior. It's probably fine, but it'd help if
there were a comment explaining it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
