sqoop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Abraham Elmahrek" <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 27248: SQOOP-1629:Add unique constraint on the Config table for name and type
Date Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:01:12 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/#review58891
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Careful with extra white spaces. Also, a few nits.


repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbyTestCase.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/#comment100039>

    nam => name



repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbyTestCase.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/#comment100041>

    spacing seems off here.



repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/TestRespositorySchemaUpgrade.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/#comment100046>

    With the three columns, there are 2^8 combinations that should be tested? (Name, Type,
configurable ID):
    1. Same name
    2. Same type
    3. Same configurable
    4. Same name and type
    5. Same name and configurable
    6. Sam type and configurable
    7. same name, type, and configurable
    8. Nothing the same
    
    Cool to add later though. Can we create a Jira to add test cases for this?


Careful

- Abraham Elmahrek


On Oct. 28, 2014, 9:05 p.m., Veena Basavaraj wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 28, 2014, 9:05 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Sqoop.
> 
> 
> Repository: sqoop-sqoop2
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> see jira
> 
> Note: This unique ness is stricter scross the entire sqoop system, since we want to be
able to use the config names independently ( wihtout any configurable Id along with it ) to
create jobs
> 
> Note I have rebased to the latest on 28th morning/
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbyRepositoryHandler.java
514b5ac 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbySchemaConstants.java
f579b93 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbySchemaUpgradeQuery.java
0bdb4c6 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/DerbyTestCase.java
3398c91 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/TestConnectorHandling.java
ca40545 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/TestInputTypes.java
7f35f8c 
>   repository/repository-derby/src/test/java/org/apache/sqoop/repository/derby/TestRespositorySchemaUpgrade.java
7687be7 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/27248/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> yes
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Veena Basavaraj
> 
>


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