rreddy-22 commented on code in PR #20882:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/20882#discussion_r2535122768
##########
storage/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/storage/internals/log/ProducerStateManagerTest.java:
##########
@@ -214,7 +214,9 @@ public void testControlRecordBumpsProducerEpoch() {
appendClientEntry(stateManager, producerId, epoch, defaultSequence,
0L, false);
short bumpedProducerEpoch = 1;
- appendEndTxnMarker(stateManager, producerId, bumpedProducerEpoch,
ControlRecordType.ABORT, 1L);
+ // This test verifies state management after an epoch bump, not epoch
validation.
+ // Since we use a bumped epoch (1 > 0), it's valid for both TV0 and
TV2, so behavior is identical.
+ appendEndTxnMarker(stateManager, producerId, bumpedProducerEpoch,
ControlRecordType.ABORT, 1L, (short) 0);
Review Comment:
It says that the behavior is identical for tv0 and tv2 since we're using a
bumped epoch
##########
storage/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/storage/internals/log/ProducerStateManagerTest.java:
##########
@@ -214,7 +214,9 @@ public void testControlRecordBumpsProducerEpoch() {
appendClientEntry(stateManager, producerId, epoch, defaultSequence,
0L, false);
short bumpedProducerEpoch = 1;
- appendEndTxnMarker(stateManager, producerId, bumpedProducerEpoch,
ControlRecordType.ABORT, 1L);
+ // This test verifies state management after an epoch bump, not epoch
validation.
+ // Since we use a bumped epoch (1 > 0), it's valid for both TV0 and
TV2, so behavior is identical.
+ appendEndTxnMarker(stateManager, producerId, bumpedProducerEpoch,
ControlRecordType.ABORT, 1L, (short) 0);
Review Comment:
yes that right, the comment says that the behavior is identical for tv0 and
tv2 since we're using a bumped epoch
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
