oodt-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "brian Foster" <holen...@juno.com>
Subject Re: Review Request: Wengine Task Querier Thread: OODT-310
Date Wed, 09 May 2012 01:00:44 GMT


> On 2012-05-02 19:20:13, brian Foster wrote:
> > ./trunk/workflow/src/test/org/apache/oodt/cas/workflow/engine/TestTaskQuerier.java,
line 79
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/4961/diff/1/?file=105932#file105932line79>
> >
> >     When Success/done is passed in, the processor created is incorrect since it
has a sub-processor in Queued/waiting
> 
> Chris Mattmann wrote:
>     Thoughts on how to fix?
> 
> Sheryl John wrote:
>     If 'anydoneStates'/done is passed, then don't add taskProcessor and return the 'done'
processor?
> 
> Chris Mattmann wrote:
>     Good idea, Sheryl, I will try that.
> 
> brian Foster wrote:
>     Maybe change getProcessor signature to something along the lines of:
>     
>     private WorkflowProcessor getProcessor(String id,
>                                            double priority,
>                                            String stateName,
>                                            String categoryName,
>                                            List<WorkflowProcessor> subProcessors);
>     
>     Then just make some helper methods which build test WorkflowProcessors... Maybe even
make a WorkflowProcessorBuilder class:
>     
>     public class WorkflowProcessorBuilder {
>     
>       private String id;
>       private double priority;
>       private List<WorkflowProcessor> subProcessors;
>     
>       private WorkflowProcessorBuilder() {
>         subProcessors = Lists.newArrayList();
>       }
>     
>       public static WorkflowProcessorBuilder aWorkflowProcessorBuilder() {
>         return new WorkflowProcessorBuilder();
>       }
>     
>       public WorkflowProcessorBuilder withId(String id) {
>         this.id = id;
>         return this;
>       }
>     
>       public WorkflowProcessorBuilder withPriority(double priority) {
>         this.priority = priority;
>         return this;
>       }
>     
>       public WorkflowProcessorBuilder with(WorkflowProcessorBuilder wpb) {
>         subProcessors.add(wpb.build());
>         return this;
>       }
>       ...
>       ...
>       ...
>     
>       public WorkflowProcessor build() {
>         WorkflowProcessor wp = new ...
>         wp.setId(id);
>         wp.setPriority(priority);
>         wp.setSubProcessors(subProcessors);
>         ...
>         return wp;
>       }
>     }

actually:

  public static WorkflowProcessorBuilder aWorkflowProcessorBuilder() {
    return new WorkflowProcessorBuilder();
  }

should be:
  
  public static WorkflowProcessorBuilder aWorkflowProcessor() {
    return new WorkflowProcessorBuilder();
  }


- brian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/4961/#review7482
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2012-05-02 05:08:45, Chris Mattmann wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/4961/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-05-02 05:08:45)
> 
> 
> Review request for oodt, brian Foster, Ricky Nguyen, Paul Ramirez, Sheryl John, and Thomas
Bennett.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Task Querier thread for OODT-310. See javadocs on: https://builds.apache.org/job/oodt-trunk/javadoc/org/apache/oodt/cas/workflow/engine/TaskQuerier.html
> 
> 
> This addresses bug OODT-310.
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OODT-310
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   ./trunk/workflow/src/main/java/org/apache/oodt/cas/workflow/engine/TaskQuerier.java
1332505 
>   ./trunk/workflow/src/main/java/org/apache/oodt/cas/workflow/engine/WorkflowProcessor.java
1331866 
>   ./trunk/workflow/src/test/org/apache/oodt/cas/workflow/engine/TestTaskQuerier.java
PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/4961/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Includes unit test, that currently isn't passing. I think I know why (something up with
my threading logic and synchronized keywords) but wanted to throw it up for review. I'll likely
be working on this tomorrow or the following evening.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris
> 
>


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