xtern commented on code in PR #1434: URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/1434#discussion_r1053156119
########## modules/schema/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/util/ColocationHashFunction.java: ########## @@ -15,20 +15,17 @@ * limitations under the License. */ -package org.apache.ignite.internal.sql.engine.metadata; - -import java.util.function.ToIntFunction; +package org.apache.ignite.internal.util; /** - * AffinityService interface. - * TODO Documentation https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-15859 + * Function to calculate a hash of the colocation fields of a row. */ -public interface AffinityService { +@FunctionalInterface +public interface ColocationHashFunction<T> { Review Comment: _> Why do we need several implementations anyway?_ Because currently we have different implementations for BinaryRow and RowT. My proposal - remove `ColocationHashFunction` interface and keep hash calculations for `BinaryRow` and `RowT` independent. They will both use HashCalculator, maybe I was wrong and we don't need to unify/mark them. WDYT? -- 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]
