[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13414200#comment-13414200
 ] 

Robert Kanter commented on OOZIE-865:
-------------------------------------

That's good; verifying unequal fork/join pairs would probably get really 
complicated.
(just to clarify: the patch I uploaded does not allow unequal fork/join pairs)
                
> ForkJoin validator checks total lengths of forks vs. joins instead of actual 
> paths
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OOZIE-865
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-865
>             Project: Oozie
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 3.2.0
>            Reporter: Harsh J
>            Assignee: Robert Kanter
>         Attachments: OOZIE-865.patch, workflow.xml
>
>
> Consider a WF that has four fork paths, each to a decision node, and each of 
> these eventually in their further paths end at a single join node (thereby 
> resulting in a valid DAG).
> When such a WF is passed to Oozie and fork join validator is enabled, the 
> validation fails cause the numForks(4) > numJoins(1). This naive way appears 
> to be wrong to compare, and we should ideally only compare true path based 
> forks->joins lists, if possible.
> This causes a regression if the fork join validation is left enabled. 
> Workaround for such workflows currently is to disable fork join validation 
> via {{oozie.validate.ForkJoin}} set to {{false}} at the server.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to