Alexey Serbin has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/20827 )

Change subject: KUDU-3252: Follow up to replica placement bug
......................................................................


Patch Set 1:

(4 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/master/placement_policy-test.cc
File src/kudu/master/placement_policy-test.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/master/placement_policy-test.cc@1568
PS1, Line 1568: TEST_F(PlacementPolicyTest, TestSelectReplica) {
It would be great to add a small comment to describe the essence of this test.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/master/placement_policy-test.cc@1569
PS1, Line 1569: const
nit: could use 'constexpr' here?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/master/placement_policy-test.cc@1569
PS1, Line 1569: 4
That's quite uncommon replication factor, and usually even replication factors 
aren't allowed in Kudu unless a particular flag is customized otherwise.

Could you add a comment to explain the usage of such an unusual RF in this test 
scenario?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/util/random_util.h
File src/kudu/util/random_util.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/20827/1/src/kudu/util/random_util.h@84
PS1, Line 84:   CHECK_GE(k, 0);
Why to have this if k is already of uint32_t type?  Isn't it true for every 
number of the uint32_t type?



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/20827
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I28582cae538ca27fa26fbfae84460b3b264ddb86
Gerrit-Change-Number: 20827
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Mahesh Reddy <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Reviewer: Mahesh Reddy <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 23:46:53 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to