accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ke...@deenlo.com
Subject Re: Review Request 16081: ACCUMULO-1958 - Safer Range constructor
Date Fri, 06 Dec 2013 20:35:07 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16081/#review29907
-----------------------------------------------------------



src/core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/data/Range.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/16081/#comment57384>

    I am thinking it might be a good idea to do the check beforeStartKey() check for this
constructor and the readFields() method.  Thinking about the case of deserializing corrupted
data.  readFields() is used in a similar way to a constructor.


- kturner


On Dec. 6, 2013, 5:06 p.m., Bill Havanki wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/16081/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dec. 6, 2013, 5:06 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for accumulo.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ACCUMULO-1958
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1958
> 
> 
> Repository: accumulo
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Based on Sean's strategy, creates a new protected Range constructor without the start/stop
key check, and adds the check to the public six-argument constructor. Opted not to deprecate
the public constructor at this time, since it is now safe.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/core/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/core/data/Range.java 7ef0dc5710877cdd0dd3ead69e7db5d8c9ef68c1

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16081/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Unit testing for Range still passes.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bill Havanki
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message