phet commented on code in PR #3937:
URL: https://github.com/apache/gobblin/pull/3937#discussion_r1586649678
##########
gobblin-service/src/test/java/org/apache/gobblin/service/modules/orchestration/OrchestratorTest.java:
##########
@@ -244,9 +250,10 @@ public void createTopologySpec() {
}
// Make sure TopologyCatalog is empty
Assert.assertTrue(specs.size() == 0, "Spec store should be empty before
addition");
- // Make sure TopologyCatalog Listener is empty
- Assert.assertTrue(specCompiler.getTopologySpecMap().size() == 0,
"SpecCompiler should not know about any Topology "
- + "before addition");
+ Assert.assertTrue(specCompiler.getTopologySpecMap().size() == 1,
"SpecCompiler should know about any Topology "
+ + " irrespective of what is there in the topology catalog");
+ // Make sure TopologyCatalog empty
+ Assert.assertTrue(this.topologyCatalog.getSize() == 0, "Topology catalog
should contain 0 Spec before addition");
Review Comment:
seems this asserts that the spec compiler's topos may now potentially
deviate from the topo catalog's. that may make the system harder to reason
about... is it really a good thing to drop such an invariant?
--
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: dev-unsubscr...@gobblin.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
