Alexey Serbin has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Add snapshot scans to fuzz-itest ......................................................................
Patch Set 12: (1 comment) http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/4996/12/src/kudu/integration-tests/fuzz-itest.cc File src/kudu/integration-tests/fuzz-itest.cc: PS12, Line 574: down_cast<kudu::server::LogicalClock*>( : tablet()->clock().get()) > you mean in this test? how could it be different? Thank you for the clarification. My question was more about generic approach to justify usage of the down_cast<> code: to use that down_cast<> it's better to be 100% sure the release mode builds will see the same control paths that debug mode builds see and all those path are validated. I don't know how to get 100% assurance on that in general. Frankly, I don't think it's even possible to provide such a guarantee. That's why I think using down_cast<> is dangerous. :) As for this test, since it's scope is confined, I don't feel strong against using down_cast<> -- it's all up to you. I just wanted to understand what was the rationale behind using down_cast<> -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/4996 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I4d15129e83c5c9afa9b643e674c8a23e18a2fa0e Gerrit-PatchSet: 12 Gerrit-Project: kudu Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: David Ribeiro Alves <dral...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <aser...@cloudera.com> Gerrit-Reviewer: David Ribeiro Alves <dral...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcry...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins Gerrit-Reviewer: Mike Percy <mpe...@apache.org> Gerrit-Reviewer: Tidy Bot Gerrit-Reviewer: Todd Lipcon <t...@apache.org> Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
