ibessonov commented on code in PR #3149:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/3149#discussion_r1477794516


##########
modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/thread/ThreadAttributes.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+ * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
+ * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+ * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+ * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *      http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.ignite.internal.thread;
+
+import java.util.Set;
+
+/**
+ * Holds some thread attributes.
+ */
+@SuppressWarnings("InterfaceMayBeAnnotatedFunctional")
+public interface ThreadAttributes {
+    /**
+     * Returns all operations that this thread allows to execute.
+     */
+    Set<ThreadOperation> allowedOperations();

Review Comment:
   Would it be convenient to have a method `boolean 
allowsOperation(ThreadOperation op);`?



##########
modules/network/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/network/netty/NamedNioEventLoopGroup.java:
##########
@@ -59,7 +65,9 @@ protected Thread newThread(Runnable r, String unused) {
     /**
      * Marker class for network threads. Basically is just a {@link 
FastThreadLocalThread}.
      */
-    public static class NetworkThread extends FastThreadLocalThread {
+    public static class NetworkThread extends FastThreadLocalThread implements 
ThreadAttributes {
+        private static final Set<ThreadOperation> ALLOWED_OPERATIONS = 
unmodifiableSet(EnumSet.noneOf(ThreadOperation.class));

Review Comment:
   Why not simply assign an `emptySet()`?



##########
modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/util/JavaAssertions.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+ * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
+ * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+ * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+ * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *      http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.ignite.internal.util;
+
+/**
+ * Code to work with Java language assertions (those that relate to the {@code 
assert} keyword).
+ */
+public class JavaAssertions {

Review Comment:
   I think that this is not a good idea. Some developers might abuse methods 
like this. Generally speaking, all its usages could be replaced with different 
pattern in code. For example, extracting a method that would contain assertion 
logic.



##########
modules/storage-api/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/storage/ThreadAssertingMvPartitionStorage.java:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+ * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
+ * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+ * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+ * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *      http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.ignite.internal.storage;
+
+import static 
org.apache.ignite.internal.worker.ThreadAssertions.assertThreadAllowsToRead;
+import static 
org.apache.ignite.internal.worker.ThreadAssertions.assertThreadAllowsToWrite;
+
+import java.util.UUID;
+import java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.hlc.HybridTimestamp;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.schema.BinaryRow;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.storage.gc.GcEntry;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.util.Cursor;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.worker.ThreadAssertions;
+import org.jetbrains.annotations.Nullable;
+
+/**
+ * {@link MvPartitionStorage} that performs thread assertions when doing 
read/write operations.
+ *
+ * @see ThreadAssertions
+ */
+public class ThreadAssertingMvPartitionStorage implements MvPartitionStorage {

Review Comment:
   Can you please explain the reason of having a wrapper class instead of 
putting assertions into `SnapshotAwarePartitionDataStorage`, for example? Or 
maybe we should put some assertions in places where we use API, not into the 
implementation.
   Let me elaborate. For example, what if we have a cursor and somebody reads 
from it? Should we create wrapper for it as well? Should we create wrapper for 
all cursors in storages?
   It makes the code too complicated in my opinion, too many classes and too 
many wrappers, and what are the benefits? The fact that you would place 
assertion into a single implementation rather than several implementations for 
several engines (potentially)? This is arguable. All I see is a code that 
re-implements a lot of methods of existing interface, forcing us to modify more 
classes if we modify the interface itself.



-- 
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]

Reply via email to