sqoop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Veena Basavaraj (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (SQOOP-2113) Modify REST API for the RU operation on job and link config
Date Mon, 23 Mar 2015 14:55:11 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-2113?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14375993#comment-14375993
] 

Veena Basavaraj edited comment on SQOOP-2113 at 3/23/15 2:54 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I thought it was obvious from the prev message, but here is the detailed explanation.

Initially a value of s config may be null, for instance the case of  state variable generated
in the connector. A user might want to edit them to add a value and this will throw an exception
since the record wont even exist, but when then fetch the configs via the link or job command,
they will get all the configs, even with null values in the list. So it is misleading. Secondly
if a config input is declared for a link or job config, unless the field says not nullable,
a user should be able to store "null" for it and then use that value. It is semantically correct.
Some of the integration tests were failing "with my patch
 because I did not realize that we were not honoring this aspect.
Hope this explains. 



was (Author: vybs):
I thought it was obvious from the prev message, but here is the detailed explanation.

Initially a value of s config may be null, for instance the case of  state variable generated
in the connector. A user might want to edit them to add a value and this will throw an exception
since the record wont even exist, but when then fetch the configs via the link or job command,
they will get all the configs, even with null values in the list. So it is misleading. Secondly
if a config input is declared for a link or job config, unless the field says not nullable,
a user should be able to store "null" for it and then use that value. It is semantically correct.
Some of the integration tests were failing because I did not realize that we were not honoring
this aspect.
Hope this explains. 


> Modify REST API for the RU operation on job and link config
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SQOOP-2113
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-2113
>             Project: Sqoop
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Veena Basavaraj
>            Assignee: Veena Basavaraj
>             Fix For: 1.99.6
>
>         Attachments: SQOOP-2113-1.patch, SQOOP-2113-1.patch, SQOOP-2113-2.patch
>
>
> based on the design doc for 1516, support the RU operation on configs for rest



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message