> On May 22, 2013, 11:34 p.m., Rohini Palaniswamy wrote: > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionCheckXCommand.java, > > line 230 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/diff/1/?file=295134#file295134line230> > > > > This might cause duplicate events
removed from here > On May 22, 2013, 11:34 p.m., Rohini Palaniswamy wrote: > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionKillXCommand.java, > > line 105 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/diff/1/?file=295135#file295135line105> > > > > This condition is right why this condition is right might be another discussion :). changed it back for this patch > On May 22, 2013, 11:34 p.m., Rohini Palaniswamy wrote: > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/SignalXCommand.java, > > line 316 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/diff/1/?file=295138#file295138line316> > > > > Duplicate events will be generated. Why not do in ActionEndXCommand ? ActionEndX seems better. thanks > On May 22, 2013, 11:34 p.m., Rohini Palaniswamy wrote: > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/event/TestEventGeneration.java, > > line 301 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/diff/1/?file=295140#file295140line301> > > > > Instead of calling StartX and SignalX, can we run a actual workflow and > > see if we get STARTED and SUCCESS (or FAILURE. Either one will do). Can > > keep suspend and kill cases as it is. adding for checking actions events - Mona ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/#review20921 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 21, 2013, 4:09 a.m., Mona Chitnis wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 21, 2013, 4:09 a.m.) > > > Review request for oozie. > > > Description > ------- > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-1375 > > Note: > 1. The SignalXCommand part of the patch will be rebased after the bug-fix for > duplicate wf_job event generation > 2. Looking for better solution than not changing method handleNonTransient > from protected to public (visibleForTesting does not work outside packages) > > > This addresses bug OOZIE-1375. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-1375 > > > Diffs > ----- > > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionCheckXCommand.java > 1484558 > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionKillXCommand.java > 1484558 > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionStartXCommand.java > 1484558 > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/ActionXCommand.java > 1484558 > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/wf/SignalXCommand.java > 1484558 > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/event/WorkflowActionEvent.java > 1484558 > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/event/TestEventGeneration.java > 1484558 > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/executor/jpa/TestWorkflowActionGetJPAExecutor.java > 1484558 > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/service/TestEventHandlerService.java > 1484558 > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/test/XDataTestCase.java 1484558 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11295/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Testcase added. Other test files including XTestCase edited to enhance > utility method createWfAction() to accept pending flag > > > Thanks, > > Mona Chitnis > >
