anton-vinogradov commented on code in PR #13095:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/13095#discussion_r3579510516
##########
modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/transactions/TxEntryValueHolder.java:
##########
@@ -119,25 +116,6 @@ public boolean hasReadValue() {
return hasReadVal;
}
- /**
- * @param ctx Cache context.
- * @throws IgniteCheckedException If marshaling failed.
- */
- public void marshal(GridCacheContext<?, ?> ctx) throws
IgniteCheckedException {
- if (hasWriteVal && val != null)
- val.prepareMarshal(ctx.cacheObjectContext());
- }
-
- /**
- * @param ctx Cache context.
- * @param ldr Class loader.
- * @throws IgniteCheckedException If unmarshalling failed.
- */
- public void unmarshal(CacheObjectValueContext ctx, ClassLoader ldr) throws
IgniteCheckedException {
- if (hasWriteVal && val != null)
Review Comment:
Not lost — it moved into the generated `TxEntryValueHolderMarshaller`
(`val.marshal(ctx)` / `val.unmarshal(ctx, ldr)`, with the context passed down
from the enclosing `IgniteTxEntry`). The `hasWriteVal` gate didn't survive, but
it carried no effective behavior: `CacheObject.marshal` is internally guarded
(fills `valBytes` only when absent) and read-side values arrive from the store
already in binary form, so for them the call is a no-op — same net result as
master's gated prepare. Symmetrically on unmarshal (`val == null` guard; binary
values don't materialize).
--
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]
