Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/82#issuecomment-182186710
policy to be marked down when there is syntax issue with this policy
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EAGLE-95
Author: murkrishn murkri...@ebay.com
Github user murkrishn closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/82
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
GitHub user murkrishn opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/82
EAGLE-95 DAM HDFS topology fails to start, if there is invalid policy
Redo of PR #71
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull
Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/82#issuecomment-181254028
@yonzhang Edward, could you verify with this patch ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user yonzhang commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/82#issuecomment-181710335
this patch works for me, thanks for contributing this patch. close that now.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-181191039
@yonzhang Edward, let me redo the PR
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user murkrishn closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user yonzhang commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-180540489
yes, if that passed all checks, let us close this PR. But when I apply this
patch and try to test, it has the following issues
Github user murkrishn commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51680540
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/AlertDefinitionDAOImpl.java
---
@@ -83,4 +85,27 @@
Github user murkrishn commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51680557
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/AlertDefinitionDAOImpl.java
---
@@ -83,4 +85,27 @@
Github user murkrishn commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51680576
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/PolicyDefinitionDAO.java
---
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
Github user yonzhang commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-179026687
it is not correct for showing log stack. Normally, it is LOG.error("some
message", ex) where ex is the exception object which is passed from catch
clause.
Github user RalphSu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51576194
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/PolicyDefinitionDAO.java
---
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
Github user RalphSu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51575914
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/AlertDefinitionDAOImpl.java
---
@@ -83,4 +85,27 @@
Github user RalphSu commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#discussion_r51577341
--- Diff:
eagle-core/eagle-policy/eagle-policy-base/src/main/java/org/apache/eagle/policy/dao/PolicyDefinitionEntityDAOImpl.java
---
@@ -17,14
Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-177786359
@yonzhang could you let me know your thoughts on the code
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user RalphSu commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-176549583
@yonzhang @murkrishn
The AlertDefinitionDAOImpl could be replaced by PolicyDefinitionDAOImpl.
The last time refactor doesn't remove alertdefinition dao
Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-176209284
@yonzhang , as per your design have updated the source. Could you please
review now.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user murkrishn commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-175984692
Thanks for pointing it out @yonzhang.
To avoid the same, I will still go with determining the markdown for the
policy at PolicyProcessExecutor class
Github user senthilec566 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-175729908
@yonzhang , we will modify the code not to do two siddhi query parsing..
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user yonzhang commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/71#issuecomment-175642671
It looks not efficient to do two siddhi query parsing. We should do only
one siddhi query parsing and catch exception when parsing fails. If parsing
fails,
21 matches
Mail list logo
