I was talking about submitting a PR to the Cassandra project to add a
getter.
Gary
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022, 17:02 Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:47 PM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> >
> > Time add a better to Cassandra in a PR! ;-)
>
> I took my chances pushing the commit directly a
If you're trying to test how CI handles a commit, then yeah, file a
PR. Those PR builds are the same as a commit build.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 4:02 PM Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:47 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> >
> > Time add a better to Cassandra in a PR! ;-)
>
> I took m
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:47 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Time add a better to Cassandra in a PR! ;-)
I took my chances pushing the commit directly and it failed on MacOS
(but retrieved the ephemeral port correctly), ;-(. Next time I'll opt
for a PR. Maybe the timeout is the issue. The MacOS machin
Time add a better to Cassandra in a PR! ;-)
Gary
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022, 15:31 Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:19 AM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> > Using 0 to get an ephemeral is guaranteed to work (until the OS runs out
> of
> > ports). Using AvailablePortFinder does not guarant
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 11:19 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Using 0 to get an ephemeral is guaranteed to work (until the OS runs out of
> ports). Using AvailablePortFinder does not guarantee anything IIRC. Isn't
> there a (small) chance that someone else on the machine can use that port
> before we do?
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 10:54 AM Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> Regarding your remark about providers... `Provider#getPriority()` has the
> following javadoc: *"Gets the priority (natural ordering) of this Provider"*,
> hence I would have expected it to work the same lowest-comes-first way, but
> apparent
Using 0 to get an ephemeral is guaranteed to work (until the OS runs out of
ports). Using AvailablePortFinder does not guarantee anything IIRC. Isn't
there a (small) chance that someone else on the machine can use that port
before we do? Assuming there is an API that says 'this is my actual port'
i
Okay, then we have consensus for changing the property source priority
field handling to lowest-comes-first strategy. I recommend landing this
feature in 2.18.0 rather than 2.17.3 or something, since this is
potentially a breaking change of a not working feature.
Regarding your remark about provid
Hi Volkan,
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:23 AM Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
> My preference would be the *lowest-value-comes-first* strategy for the
> following reasons:
>
>- Natural ordering in Java (e.g., `Stream#sorted()`) yields the same
>result
>- This is how it works for Spring's `@Order` a
Doh! I was responding to Gary's remark but after checking the diff in more
detail, indeed there are no fixed ports anywhere. On the contrary, this
commit addresses that issue.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:22 AM Piotr P. Karwasz
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 1:18 AM Gary Gregory
> wrote:
> >
> >
My preference would be the *lowest-value-comes-first* strategy for the
following reasons:
- Natural ordering in Java (e.g., `Stream#sorted()`) yields the same
result
- This is how it works for Spring's `@Order` annotation
I would appreciate it if you can align javadoc and manual with thi
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 1:18 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Can't we use an ephemeral port here?
I am not sure I understand: `AvailablePortFinder` does return a port
in the ephemeral range.
Piotr
>
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022, 19:14 wrote:
>
> > This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hos
We indeed can and should!
Piotr, see `JsonTemplateLayoutNullEventDelimiterTest` and
`nullEventDelimitedJsonTemplateLayoutLogging.xml` for inspiration.
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 1:18 AM Gary Gregory wrote:
> Can't we use an ephemeral port here?
>
> Gary
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2022, 19:14 wrote:
>
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
