[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3303?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15421180#comment-15421180 ]
Anton Vinogradov edited comment on IGNITE-3303 at 8/15/16 3:58 PM: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Saikat, I still see static fields, are they necessary? I've started to refactoring code, please see my changes here: https://github.com/avinogradovgg/ignite/commit/8ed27ef9a542efadec9606bc3b193154389eb38e ... please use these changes in case they are correct ... but faced with tests passed with exception: {noformat} Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: This method should be accessed under org.apache.ignite.thread.IgniteThread at org.apache.ignite.internal.IgnitionEx.localIgnite(IgnitionEx.java:1291) at org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteKernal.readResolve(IgniteKernal.java:3368) at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor26.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) {noformat} So, seems tests should be refactored to fail at such problems. Tests should check than each event at Ignite was handled by other side. Currently, I still see no check at tests. also, I'm not sure this code {{synchronized (ctx.getCheckpointLock())}} is necessary since we using LinkedBlockingQueue, could you please tell me more about that? was (Author: avinogradov): Saikat, I still see static fields, are they necessary? I've started to refactoring code, please see my changes here: https://github.com/avinogradovgg/ignite/commit/8ed27ef9a542efadec9606bc3b193154389eb38e ... please use these changes in case they correct ... but faced with tests passed with exception: {noformat} Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: This method should be accessed under org.apache.ignite.thread.IgniteThread at org.apache.ignite.internal.IgnitionEx.localIgnite(IgnitionEx.java:1291) at org.apache.ignite.internal.IgniteKernal.readResolve(IgniteKernal.java:3368) at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor26.invoke(Unknown Source) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) {noformat} So, seems tests should be refactored to fail at such problems. Tests should check than each event at Ignite was handled by other side. Currently, I still see no check at tests. also, I'm not sure this code {{synchronized (ctx.getCheckpointLock())}} is necessary since we using LinkedBlockingQueue, could you please tell me more about that? > Apache Flink Integration - Flink source to run a continuous query against one > or multiple caches > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: IGNITE-3303 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3303 > Project: Ignite > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: streaming > Reporter: Saikat Maitra > Assignee: Anton Vinogradov > > Apache Flink integration > +++ *Ignite as a bidirectional Connector* +++ > As a Flink source => run a continuous query against one or multiple > caches [4]. > Related discussion : > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Apache-Flink-lt-gt-Apache-Ignite-integration-td8163.html -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)