-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#review3666
-----------------------------------------------------------


Needs some finishing touches to make the patch complete.


trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8167>

    A more concise form to avoid repeated calls to getStackTrace can be:
    
    for(StackTraceElement stackTraceElem: ex.getStackTrace()) {
        sb.append(stackTraceElem + "\n");
    }



trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8171>

    Can you annotate this as an unexpected behavior and log the details instead 
of printing it to stderr?



trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8168>

    Why is this message printed to stderr and not logged?



trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8169>

    Same comment as above. Why is this message printed to stderr and not logged?



trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8172>

    At this point, the value of returnVal is not known. Set it to -1



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8174>

    Can you add comments about what is being done in the block of code below?



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8175>

    Since new assertions are being added, its a good time to document what is 
being tested and why



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8176>

    Since new assertions are being added, its a good time to add what is being 
tested and why



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8177>

    The test coverage has to be improved. The return value for -1 and 0 are 
being tested. The positive return values are not being tested.



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8179>

    Very clever! Is this the recommended mechanism of testing private methods? 
Also add a comment here if this is the recommended mechanism.



trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/#comment8178>

    Can this be changed to a check for 0 instead of a check for non -1?


- Santhosh


On 2011-12-06 03:34:49, Kiran Nagasubramanian wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2011-12-06 03:34:49)
> 
> 
> Review request for oozie, Mohammad Islam and Angelo K. Huang.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> When retrieving the log content from compressed log files(gzip format), 
> unexpected exceptions are raised when file names dont conform to the standard 
> format.Those exceptions need to be handled gracefully.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug OOZIE-627.
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-627
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/util/XLogStreamer.java 1210717 
>   trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/util/TestLogStreamer.java 1210717 
>   trunk/release-log.txt 1210717 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3021/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Yes
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kiran
> 
>

Reply via email to