> On 2011-12-05 21:32:37, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote: > > Some code formatting and error message comments. The test coverage has to > > be improved. > > Santhosh Srinivasan wrote: > I forgot to add my most important comment. This code fix will break > backward compatibility, i.e., what used to work before will now fail. Are > there any options to mitigate the impact to existing users?
We will educate users through updated documentation that this should be expected behavior and lack of checking earlier was in fact a bug. > On 2011-12-05 21:32:37, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote: > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/command/coord/TestCoordSubmitXCommand.java, > > line 99 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/diff/1/?file=61960#file61960line99> > > > > The test case covers both input-events and output-events. Since > > input-events occurs first, the test case is not testing output-events. Can > > you add a separate test case for output-events and also test cases where > > input-events are specified with separate instance tags and similarly for > > output-events if its applicable. success case of multiple <instance> tags does not apply to output-event dataset. It can only have single tag and single instance within it. added success and failure cases for the input-event part > On 2011-12-05 21:32:37, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote: > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/command/coord/TestCoordSubmitXCommand.java, > > line 128 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/diff/1/?file=61960#file61960line128> > > > > Can you also check for the error code? done > On 2011-12-05 21:32:37, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote: > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/coord/CoordSubmitXCommand.java, > > line 314 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/diff/1/?file=61959#file61959line314> > > > > Change 1 to one. Is there a corrective action similar to that of the > > input-events? corrective action for output-event is not the same. Nevertheless, added information informing about it. - Mona ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/#review3636 ----------------------------------------------------------- On 2011-12-05 20:15:04, Mona Chitnis wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated 2011-12-05 20:15:04) > > > Review request for oozie, Mohammad Islam and Angelo K. Huang. > > > Summary > ------- > > For the coordinator input events, if there are multiple dates, it uses the > first date to resolve the data > instance, instead of giving warning or error. > For example: > <data-in name="din1" dataset="ds1"> > <instance>2010-06-11T00:30Z,2010-06-11T00:31Z,2010-06-11T00:32Z</instance> > </data-in> > > Similarly for output events. > > This patch will give error for the above case and protect against submission > of job that defaults to the first date without the knowledge of user. > > > This addresses bug OOZIE-15. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-15 > > > Diffs > ----- > > > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/command/coord/CoordSubmitXCommand.java > 1209756 > > trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/command/coord/TestCoordSubmitXCommand.java > 1209756 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3018/diff > > > Testing > ------- > > yes > > > Thanks, > > Mona > >
