[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4996?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16669301#comment-16669301
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on PHOENIX-4996:
-----------------------------------------

GitHub user ChinmaySKulkarni opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/phoenix/pull/401

    PHOENIX-4996: Refactor PTableImpl to use Builder Pattern

    - Added builder pattern
    - Removed unnecessary constructors and `makePTable` methods

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/ChinmaySKulkarni/phoenix PHOENIX-4996

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/phoenix/pull/401.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #401
    
----
commit e2e58fd5be5a61b53cf4e81b46b89de084e0f23d
Author: Chinmay Kulkarni <chinmayskulkarni@...>
Date:   2018-10-25T00:56:22Z

    PHOENIX-4996: Refactor PTableImpl to use Builder Pattern

----


> Refactor PTableImpl to use Builder Pattern
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-4996
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4996
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Chinmay Kulkarni
>            Assignee: Chinmay Kulkarni
>            Priority: Major
>
> Currently _PTableImpl_ has many constructor parameters, overloaded 
> constructors as well as overloaded versions of _makePTable_ which basically 
> creates a new PTable itself. Because of this, constructing new PTable 
> instances is becoming very difficult and error-prone. We should refactor this 
> to use the builder pattern. This will improve usability and readability of 
> the code at the cost of some amount of code repetition due to limitations of 
> the builder pattern itself.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to