Github user olegz commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/123#discussion_r44872756
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-provenance-repository-bundle/nifi-persistent-provenance-repository/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/provenance/lucene/DocsReader.java
---
@@ -100,101 +96,61 @@ private ProvenanceEventRecord getRecord(final
Document d, final RecordReader rea
}
}
- if ( record == null ) {
- throw new IOException("Failed to find Provenance Event " + d);
- } else {
- return record;
+ if (record == null) {
+ logger.warn("Failed to read Provenance Event for '" + d + "'.
The event file may be missing or corrupted");
}
- }
+ return record;
+ }
public Set<ProvenanceEventRecord> read(final List<Document> docs,
final Collection<Path> allProvenanceLogFiles,
- final AtomicInteger retrievalCount, final int maxResults, final
int maxAttributeChars) throws IOException {
- if (retrievalCount.get() >= maxResults) {
- return Collections.emptySet();
- }
-
- LuceneUtil.sortDocsForRetrieval(docs);
--- End diff --
Hmm, I don't think so. Based on my observation it was done to group files
based on storage file name and sorting had that sideeffect, so in a way the
additional sorting is a bit of an overkill here, hence refactoring and new
utility operation.
---
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.
---
