[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4784?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13150224#comment-13150224
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-4784:
----------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12503701/HBASE-4784.patch
against trunk revision .
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
+1 tests included. The patch appears to include 3 new or modified tests.
-1 javadoc. The javadoc tool appears to have generated -163 warning
messages.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac
compiler warnings.
-1 findbugs. The patch appears to introduce 51 new Findbugs (version
1.3.9) warnings.
+1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of
release audit warnings.
-1 core tests. The patch failed these unit tests:
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.master.TestDistributedLogSplitting
org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.hfile.TestHFileBlock
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/252//testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/252//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/252//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Void return types not handled correctly for CoprocessorProtocol methods
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-4784
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4784
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: coprocessors
> Affects Versions: 0.92.0, 0.94.0
> Reporter: Gary Helmling
> Assignee: Gary Helmling
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.92.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-4784.patch
>
>
> If a CoprocessorProtocol derived interface defines a method with a void
> return type, the method cannot be called using HTable.coprocessorExec().
> Instead ExecResult will throw an IOException on the client trying to do a
> Class.forName() on "void".
> Looking at ExecResult, it appears that the valueType field (which causes the
> error) is no longer even used, so I'd suggest we just get rid of it.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
