voonhous commented on PR #19485: URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/19485#issuecomment-5574423798
Two nits from my review body did not get a reply. Both are still open, and both are fine to decline: - `TestHoodieDeltaStreamerWithMultiWriter.awaitCondition` (line 486) still only logs on expiry, so the backfill can start early and surface later as an unrelated conflict. Sibling helper, so arguably out of scope here. Could it fail with a message instead, or would you rather keep it separate? - The description cites #16228 but not #15686 (HUDI-5550), which is the same flaky test. Could we link it, and cite `f9a597bd783c` (HUDI-6842, #9671) as the precedent where knowing which assertion failed was the fix? Everything else from that review looks addressed, verified against the code at `6b07137` rather than the replies. -- 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]
