ifesdjeen commented on code in PR #3689:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pull/3689#discussion_r1848127129


##########
test/distributed/org/apache/cassandra/fuzz/topology/HarryTopologyMixupTest.java:
##########
@@ -164,90 +216,49 @@ private static CommandGen<Spec> cqlOperations(Spec spec)
 
     private static Command<State<Spec>, Void, ?> validateAll(State<Spec> state)
     {
-        Spec spec = state.schemaSpec;
-        var schema = spec.harry.schema();
-        boolean writeThroughAccord = schema.isWriteTimeFromAccord();
+        Spec spec = state.testState;
         List<Command<State<Spec>, Void, ?>> reads = new ArrayList<>();
-        Model model = spec.harry.quiescentChecker();
-        for (Long pd : new TreeSet<>(spec.harry.pds()))
+
+        for (Integer pkIdx : spec.pkGen.generated())
         {
-            reads.add(new HarryCommand(s -> "Harry Validate pd=" + pd  + 
state.commandNamePostfix(), s -> model.validate(Query.selectAllColumns(schema, 
pd, false))));
-            // as of this writing Accord does not support ORDER BY
-            if (!writeThroughAccord)
-                reads.add(new HarryCommand(s -> "Harry Reverse Validate pd=" + 
pd + state.commandNamePostfix(), s -> 
model.validate(Query.selectAllColumns(schema, pd, true))));

Review Comment:
   I have considered it to be an unnecessary aspect of the test in the given 
context. Main purpose of the test seems to be testing consistency, so it is 
important to verify the data is there after topology changes. Reading in 
reverse order should be tested separately. 
   
   I have brought it back for now.



-- 
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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to