sk0x50 commented on code in PR #3704:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/3704#discussion_r1597416986
##########
modules/replicator/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/replicator/ReplicaService.java:
##########
@@ -210,7 +225,14 @@ private <R> CompletableFuture<R> sendToReplica(String
targetNodeConsistentId, Re
return null;
});
} else {
- res.completeExceptionally(errResp.throwable());
+ if (retryExecutor != null &&
matchAny(unwrapCause(errResp.throwable()), ACQUIRE_LOCK_ERR, REPLICA_MISS_ERR))
{
Review Comment:
> I disagree. The whole exception design is based on error codes. Checking
error codes is more clean then comparing exception classes.
I disagree, using Java classes that represent an exception is a widespread
practice. Error codes are a way to provide the user with an additional clue on
critical situations, especially in the case of thin clients that are not
supported exceptions.
> No it should not. This error code and related functionality should be
removed, because we got retries from client side. I plan to create a ticket for
this.
Ok, I got it.
--
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]
