----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3524/#review4456 -----------------------------------------------------------
In my opinion its better not re-size when the new size is smaller that number of events in the queue. The warning in log will can indicate that the queue was not re-sized. The changes overall look fine to me (few spacing nits). - Prasad On 2012-01-18 08:47:35, Juhani Connolly wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/3524/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2012-01-18 08:47:35) > > > Review request for Flume. > > > Summary > ------- > > Modified configure to check for an exisitng deque, and copy across data if > the size has changed. If the new capacity is smaller than the number of items > remaining in the old one, data is still lost, with a logger warning. > > > This addresses bug FLUME-889. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-889 > > > Diffs > ----- > > > /branches/flume-728/flume-ng-core/src/main/java/org/apache/flume/channel/MemoryChannel.java > 1228002 > > /branches/flume-728/flume-ng-core/src/test/java/org/apache/flume/channel/TestMemoryChannel.java > 1228002 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3524/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > Created new unit test to check assumptions made along with capacity limits. > New unit test passes > All existing unit tests are fine(except for ExecSource which fails because of > development environment) > > > Thanks, > > Juhani > >
