[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-8244?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13245744#comment-13245744
]
Hadoop QA commented on HADOOP-8244:
-----------------------------------
-1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12521203/HADOOP-8244.0.patch
against trunk revision .
+1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.
-1 tests included. The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests.
Please justify why no new tests are needed for this
patch.
Also please list what manual steps were performed to
verify this patch.
+1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.
+1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac
compiler warnings.
+1 eclipse:eclipse. The patch built with eclipse:eclipse.
+1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9)
warnings.
+1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of
release audit warnings.
-1 core tests. The patch failed these unit tests:
org.apache.hadoop.fs.viewfs.TestViewFsTrash
+1 contrib tests. The patch passed contrib unit tests.
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HADOOP-Build/816//testReport/
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HADOOP-Build/816//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Improve comments on ByteBufferReadable.read
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-8244
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-8244
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Henry Robinson
> Assignee: Henry Robinson
> Attachments: HADOOP-8244.0.patch
>
>
> There are a couple of ways in which the comment on ByteBufferReadable.read
> can be improved. Since this is a public-facing API with potentially many
> implementations, it's worth taking the time to get it right.
> * We should describe what can become of the byte buffer state in the case of
> an exception (is the limit changed? where's the position?). For the
> DFSInputStream implementation, position and limit are unchanged if there is
> an error, but I don't think that's the right think to mandate for all
> implementations.
> * We should mention explicitly that 0-byte reads are legitimate - this is
> particularly important in light of HDFS-3110 which detects support for direct
> reads by issuing a 0-byte read from libhdfs.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
