[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1886?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15350573#comment-15350573
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-1886:
---------------------------------------
Github user arunmahadevan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/1470#discussion_r68537606
--- Diff:
external/storm-redis/src/main/java/org/apache/storm/redis/state/RedisKeyValueState.java
---
@@ -60,22 +64,23 @@ public RedisKeyValueState(String namespace) {
}
public RedisKeyValueState(String namespace, JedisPoolConfig
poolConfig) {
- this(namespace, poolConfig, new DefaultStateSerializer<K>(), new
DefaultStateSerializer<V>());
+ this(namespace, poolConfig, new DefaultStateSerializer<K>(), new
DefaultStateSerializer<Optional<V>>());
}
- public RedisKeyValueState(String namespace, JedisPoolConfig
poolConfig, Serializer<K> keySerializer, Serializer<V> valueSerializer) {
+ public RedisKeyValueState(String namespace, JedisPoolConfig
poolConfig, Serializer<K> keySerializer, Serializer<Optional<V>>
valueSerializer) {
--- End diff --
The user would now have to provide a `Serializer<Optional<V>>` instead of
`Serializer<V>`. If possible it might be better to keep the Optional internal
to the implementation.
> Extend KeyValueState interface with delete method
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-1886
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-1886
> Project: Apache Storm
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Balazs Kossovics
>
> Even if the implementation of checkpointing only uses the get/put methods of
> the KeyValueState interface, the existance of a delete method could be really
> useful in the general case.
> I made a first implementation, what do you think about?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
