Attila Bukor has posted comments on this change. ( http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/18024 )
Change subject: [client] fix MetaCacheEntry::Contains() ...................................................................... Patch Set 3: (4 comments) http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/18024/3/src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc File src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc: http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/18024/3/src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc@337 PS3, Line 337: #if !defined(THREAD_SANITIZER) && !defined(ADDRESS_SANITIZER) Would it make sense to change this so that we call GTEST_SKIP() if either of these is defined instead of not even having these tests in those builds? http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/18024/3/src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc@342 PS3, Line 342: // Preliminary work to do before running the benchmark scenarios. Could be Does this comment still make sense? Seems like all the setup is in SetUp(), except for GenerateOperations. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/18024/3/src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc@375 PS3, Line 375: { nit: why this extra block? http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/18024/3/src/kudu/integration-tests/client-stress-test.cc@445 PS3, Line 445: large nit: extra word -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/18024 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-Project: kudu Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I7f2deeefbf2e3cedc7654b5d977382501db14b4e Gerrit-Change-Number: 18024 Gerrit-PatchSet: 3 Gerrit-Owner: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrew Wong <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Attila Bukor <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120) Gerrit-Reviewer: Mahesh Reddy <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Tidy Bot (241) Gerrit-Comment-Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 13:00:31 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
