Igniters, the patch [1] is ready for the review.
Can someone look at it, please?
[1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7924
ср, 10 июн. 2020 г. в 23:42, Sergey Antonov :
> Pavel, Alexei thank you for your replays.
>
> > is this one special in some way?
> Yes. We have two "active" cluster st
Pavel, Alexei thank you for your replays.
> is this one special in some way?
Yes. We have two "active" cluster states: ACTIVE, ACTIVE_READ_ONLY.
Probably, I chose the wrong method's name, but I mean that in "active"
state the caches must be started.
> But it looks like we do not need methods *rea
But it looks like we do not need methods *readOnly *and *inactive*.
What is the point in adding them ?
ср, 10 июн. 2020 г. в 21:05, Alexei Scherbakov :
> Sergey Antonov,
>
> The proposal looks good to me.
> Use of org.apache.ignite.cluster.ClusterState#active adds a
> boilerplate code (a lot of
Sergey Antonov,
The proposal looks good to me.
Use of org.apache.ignite.cluster.ClusterState#active adds a
boilerplate code (a lot of static imports) and does an unnecessary state
check.
ср, 10 июн. 2020 г. в 19:02, Pavel Tupitsyn :
> Sergey,
>
> I disagree - looks weird.
> We have lots of en
Sergey,
I disagree - looks weird.
We have lots of enums, is this one special in some way?
Thanks,
Pavel
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 6:58 PM Sergey Antonov
wrote:
> Igniters, I'd like to propose a small improvement in ClusterState class. I
> want to remove the static method boolean ClusterState#act
Igniters, I'd like to propose a small improvement in ClusterState class. I
want to remove the static method boolean ClusterState#active and add
methods to the enum:
- boolean active()
- boolean readOnly()
- boolean inactive()
>From my point of view these methods more useful than comparin
