[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1245?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15130142#comment-15130142
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-1245:
---------------------------------------
Github user abhishekagarwal87 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1069#discussion_r51699466
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/org/apache/storm/utils/Utils.java ---
@@ -1374,5 +1374,61 @@ public static RuntimeException
wrapInRuntime(Exception e){
return new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
+
+ public static <T> long bitXorValsSets(java.util.Set<T> vals) {
+ long rtn = 0l;
+ for (T n : vals) {
+ rtn = bitXor(rtn, n);
+ }
+ return rtn;
+ }
+
+ public static long bitXor(Object a, Object b) {
--- End diff --
given that bixXor falls in critical path, is it possible to avoid
instanceof checks. why is there special treatment for Set type?
> port backtype.storm.daemon.acker to java
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-1245
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1245
> Project: Apache Storm
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Robert Joseph Evans
> Assignee: Basti Liu
> Labels: java-migration, jstorm-merger
>
> use
> https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/jstorm-import/jstorm-core/src/main/java/com/alibaba/jstorm/task/acker/Acker.java
> as a guide
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
