> On 2012-03-29 10:42:44, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/FsActionExecutor.java,
> >  line 334
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff/9/?file=97335#file97335line334>
> >
> >     the synchronization cannot be on the current action instance as actions 
> > are created every time they are needed. the synchronization should be on 
> > something global, ie the class hosting this method

ok. fixing


> On 2012-03-29 10:42:44, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/FsActionExecutor.java,
> >  line 341
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff/9/?file=97335#file97335line341>
> >
> >     again, this is suppose to be part of another JIRA, no?

similar to above comment for this variable.


> On 2012-03-29 10:42:44, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/FsActionExecutor.java,
> >  line 46
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff/9/?file=97335#file97335line46>
> >
> >     wasn't this going to be addressed by another JIRA?

this safeguard was required against the case if there are blank entries for 
"oozie.filesystems.supported" in oozie-site.xml or other places to configure. 
In that case, variable 'supportedSchemes' in ActionExecutor will be "" and all 
schemes will fail at check.


> On 2012-03-29 10:42:44, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/JavaActionExecutor.java,
> >  line 202
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff/9/?file=97336#file97336line202>
> >
> >     this code is duplicated in FSActionExecutor, it seems it should be 
> > factored out and reused. 
> >     
> >     Furthermore, should this be loaded then by the ActionExecutor class 
> > itself?

Checking if can be factored out up into ActionExecutor


> On 2012-03-29 10:42:44, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> > trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/service/WorkflowAppService.java, 
> > line 153
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff/9/?file=97338#file97338line153>
> >
> >     what am i missing? i still don't see the scheme being check here.

Wouldn't the checking in respective action executors suffice ? 


- Mona


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/#review6513
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2012-03-29 10:29:06, Mona Chitnis wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-03-29 10:29:06)
> 
> 
> Review request for oozie, Mohammad Islam and Angelo K. Huang.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This patch was originally worked on by Mayank Bansal. 
> I (Mona Chitnis) am in charge of handling this review request.
> 
> Description - adding hadoop.next support for oozie
> 
> 
> This addresses bug OOZIE-477.
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-477
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/service/TestLiteWorkflowAppService.java
>  1303609 
>   
> trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/TestJavaActionExecutor.java
>  1303609 
>   trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/service/WorkflowAppService.java 
> 1303609 
>   trunk/core/src/main/resources/oozie-default.xml 1303609 
>   
> trunk/core/src/test/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/TestFsActionExecutor.java
>  1303609 
>   trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/LauncherMapper.java 
> 1303609 
>   
> trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/JavaActionExecutor.java
>  1303609 
>   trunk/client/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/client/XOozieClient.java 
> 1303609 
>   trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/ActionExecutor.java 
> 1303609 
>   
> trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/oozie/action/hadoop/FsActionExecutor.java 
> 1303609 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/2059/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> tested against current unit tests
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mona
> 
>

Reply via email to