Github user mmiklavc commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/851#discussion_r155347462
--- Diff:
metron-platform/metron-common/src/main/java/org/apache/metron/common/configuration/ConfigurationsUtils.java
---
@@ -572,15 +590,22 @@ public static void
applyConfigPatchToZookeeper(ConfigurationType configurationTy
* @param patchData a JSON patch in the format specified by RFC 6902
* @param client access to zookeeeper
*/
- public static void applyConfigPatchToZookeeper(ConfigurationType
configurationType,
- Optional<String> configName,
- byte[] patchData, CuratorFramework client) throws Exception {
+ public static void applyConfigPatchToZookeeper(
+ ConfigurationType configurationType,
+ Optional<String> configName,
+ byte[] patchData, CuratorFramework client) throws Exception {
+
byte[] configData = readConfigBytesFromZookeeper(configurationType,
configName, client);
JsonNode source = JSONUtils.INSTANCE.readTree(configData);
JsonNode patch = JSONUtils.INSTANCE.readTree(patchData);
JsonNode patchedConfig = JSONUtils.INSTANCE.applyPatch(patch, source);
- writeConfigToZookeeper(configurationType, configName,
- JSONUtils.INSTANCE.toJSONPretty(patchedConfig), client);
+ byte[] prettyPatchedConfig =
JSONUtils.INSTANCE.toJSONPretty(patchedConfig);
+
+ // ensure the patch produces a valid result; otherwise exception
thrown during deserialization
--- End diff --
Heh, well our meta-PR was to address a code change that resulted in
duplication, not just a style preference. ;)
---
