hachikuji commented on a change in pull request #9401:
URL: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/9401#discussion_r525586697
##########
File path:
clients/src/main/java/org/apache/kafka/clients/producer/internals/Sender.java
##########
@@ -560,13 +562,24 @@ private void handleProduceResponse(ClientResponse
response, Map<TopicPartition,
log.trace("Received produce response from node {} with correlation
id {}", response.destination(), correlationId);
// if we have a response, parse it
if (response.hasResponse()) {
+ // TODO: Sender should exercise PartitionProduceResponse
rather than ProduceResponse.PartitionResponse
+ // https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10696
Review comment:
nit: since we have the jira for tracking, can we remove the TODO? A few
more of these in the PR.
##########
File path:
clients/src/test/java/org/apache/kafka/common/requests/ProduceResponseTest.java
##########
@@ -100,16 +113,92 @@ public void produceResponseRecordErrorsTest() {
ProduceResponse response = new ProduceResponse(responseData);
Struct struct = response.toStruct(ver);
assertEquals("Should use schema version " + ver,
ApiKeys.PRODUCE.responseSchema(ver), struct.schema());
- ProduceResponse.PartitionResponse deserialized = new
ProduceResponse(struct).responses().get(tp);
+ ProduceResponse.PartitionResponse deserialized = new
ProduceResponse(new ProduceResponseData(struct, ver)).responses().get(tp);
if (ver >= 8) {
assertEquals(1, deserialized.recordErrors.size());
assertEquals(3, deserialized.recordErrors.get(0).batchIndex);
assertEquals("Record error",
deserialized.recordErrors.get(0).message);
assertEquals("Produce failed", deserialized.errorMessage);
} else {
assertEquals(0, deserialized.recordErrors.size());
- assertEquals(null, deserialized.errorMessage);
+ assertNull(deserialized.errorMessage);
}
}
}
+
+ /**
+ * the schema in this test is from previous code and the automatic
protocol should be compatible to previous schema.
+ */
+ @Test
+ public void testCompatibility() {
Review comment:
I think this test might be overkill. We haven't done anything like this
for the other converted APIs. It's a little similar to
`MessageTest.testRequestSchemas`, which was useful verifying the generated
schemas when the message generator was being written. Soon `testRequestSchemas`
will be redundant, so I guess we have to decide if we just trust the generator
and our compatibility system tests or if we want some other canonical
representation. Thoughts?
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
