-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 961
ISSUE-2770: Code refactor calling ledgerExists two times. #2903
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
jadireddi
wants to merge
1
commit into
apache:master
Choose a base branch
from
jadireddi:Issue2770-refactor
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -144,9 +144,7 @@ public boolean ledgerExists(long ledgerId) throws IOException { | |
| // the O(1) for the ledgerCache. | ||
| if (!interleavedLedgerStorage.ledgerExists(ledgerId)) { | ||
| EntryKeyValue kv = memTable.getLastEntry(ledgerId); | ||
| if (null == kv) { | ||
| return interleavedLedgerStorage.ledgerExists(ledgerId); | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As the comment said, checking the skip list is an O(logN) operation compared to the O(1) for the ledgerCache. My thought that means the |
||
| } | ||
| return null != kv; | ||
| } | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have seen this patch before.
Maybe there is already another open PR
My question is...
Why this code was written the way it is?
In order to deal with some possible race condition ?
@merlimat do you know?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there any case that line 145 returns
false, but line 148 returnstrue?