[da-vinci] Enable compatibility of DVRT for BLOB transfer #1280
Conversation
This file contains 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
kvargha
reviewed
Nov 5, 2024
Comment on lines
-89
to
-97
|
|
||
| // Reset the mock to clear previous interactions | ||
| reset(storageEngine); | ||
|
|
||
| // Execute the onRecovery method again to test the case where the classHash file exists | ||
| when(storageEngine.getIterator(partitionNumber)).thenReturn(iterator); | ||
| recordTransformer.onRecovery(storageEngine, partitionNumber, compressor); | ||
| verify(storageEngine, never()).clearPartitionOffset(partitionNumber); | ||
| verify(storageEngine, times(1)).getIterator(partitionNumber); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we set up the mocks so that this passes?
Comment on lines
+309
to
+324
| public Integer getTransformerClassHash() { | ||
| return partitionState.getTransformerClassHash(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public void setTransformerClassHash(Integer classHash) { | ||
| this.partitionState.transformerClassHash = classHash; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String toString() { | ||
| return "OffsetRecord{" + "localVersionTopicOffset=" + getLocalVersionTopicOffset() + ", upstreamOffset=" | ||
| + getPartitionUpstreamOffsetString() + ", leaderTopic=" + getLeaderTopic() + ", offsetLag=" + getOffsetLag() | ||
| + ", eventTimeEpochMs=" + getMaxMessageTimeInMs() + ", latestProducerProcessingTimeInMs=" | ||
| + getLatestProducerProcessingTimeInMs() + ", isEndOfPushReceived=" + isEndOfPushReceived() + ", databaseInfo=" | ||
| + getDatabaseInfo() + ", realTimeProducerState=" + getRealTimeProducerState() + '}'; | ||
| + getDatabaseInfo() + ", realTimeProducerState=" + getRealTimeProducerState() + ", transformerClassHash=" | ||
| + getTransformerClassHash() + '}'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Can we make it explicit that this belongs to the record transformer? i.e. recordTransformerClassHash
Comment on lines
+191
to
+194
| "name": "transformerClassHash", | ||
| "doc": "An integer hash code of the DaVinci record transformer for compatibility checks during BLOB transfer", | ||
| "type": ["null", "int"], | ||
| "default": null |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: DaVinci record transformer -> DaVinciRecordTransformer
This will also be utilized when blob transfer isn't enabled. Can we change the phrasing to "during bootstrapping?"
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Summary
Added logic to store the DaVinci record transformer class hashcode as a field in OffsetRecord and comparing these hashcodes in the transformer utility to ensure compatibility of new transformer with the current one persisted by the storage engine
How was this PR tested?
Changes to current record transformer unit tests have been made to reflect this new logic
Does this PR introduce any user-facing changes?