> On July 19, 2017, 3:02 p.m., Madhan Neethiraj wrote: > > repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/store/graph/v1/AtlasRelationshipDefStoreV1.java > > Lines 484 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/60970/diff/1/?file=1779491#file1779491line484> > > > > It will be good to handle this while reading from vertex as well - in > > toRelationshipDef(vertex) below, so that null value in the store gets > > mapped to NONE.
Hi Madhan, I was thinking that it is not possible to create a vertex with null in this vertex property as the code has null pointered up to now. After the fix, it should always be a valid value. I can add the extra checking if you like - but I suspect it will be redundant. Or am I missing something? all the best, David. - David ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60970/#review180928 ----------------------------------------------------------- On July 19, 2017, 2:26 p.m., David Radley wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/60970/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated July 19, 2017, 2:26 p.m.) > > > Review request for atlas and Madhan Neethiraj. > > > Repository: atlas > > > Description > ------- > > ATLAS-1901: Tolerate no propogatetags on Relationshipdef > > > Diffs > ----- > > > repository/src/main/java/org/apache/atlas/repository/store/graph/v1/AtlasRelationshipDefStoreV1.java > ddf0af9abc5f07c355043e7aff54bfaae1323814 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/60970/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Ran unit tests. > I looked into creating a unit test - but this would have involved mocking > Vertex or the equivalent whcih seemed overkill for this small change. > Created a relationshipDef without propogatetags set. Without the fix it > errors - with the fix it works producing a relationshipDef with propogateTags > = NONE. > > > Thanks, > > David Radley > >
