| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
|
Please explain what is changing here, and if this is a plugin update, you need to update test scenarios too. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
If the new use cases are same here, you should add more versions to support your new implementations for newer versions, and keep compatibility with previous. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| return new ConstructorInterceptPoint[]{ | ||
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_TYPE); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should not reformat, thr code style file is in the source codes.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should not reformat, thr code style file is in the source codes.
I reset the java file which I reformat
Sorry, something went wrong.
Ok, I'll commit later |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
About #708 (comment) I mean the test versions demo codes https://github.com/apache/skywalking-java/tree/main/test/plugin/scenarios/kafka-scenario |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Please pick one for 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 as well. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
3.4, 3.5, 3.6 are same to 3.2.3 |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Logically same. But we should test. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
OK, Should I create modules kafka-3.6.x-scenario and kafka-3.7.x-scenario like kafka-2.3.x-scenario in dir /test? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Those exist because the test codes are different. If you just need to change dependency versions, you don't need to do that. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
And please fix CIs. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
… method's name from pollForFetches to poll
… method's name from pollForFetches to poll
… method's name from pollForFetches to poll
|
You should verify all locally rather than costing too much on CI. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
|
||
| For more information | ||
| 1. [JEP 403: Strongly Encapsulate JDK Internals](https://openjdk.org/jeps/403) | ||
| 2. [A peek into Java 17: Encapsulating the Java runtime internals](https://blogs.oracle.com/javamagazine/post/a-peek-into-java-17-continuing-the-drive-to-encapsulate-the-java-runtime-internals) No newline at end of file |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you made a mistake to remove this line?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you made a mistake to remove this line?
No, the CI thiks this line is a deadlink, though it can be access in browser
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The blog is there. What is the deadlink check saying?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should not remove the docs, just because a CI took says otherwise.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You should not remove the docs, just because a CI took says otherwise.
OK, I will rollback it, thank you!
Sorry, something went wrong.
I think you did not update docs accordingly, Plugin-list.md and Supported-list.md |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return CONSUMER_CONFIG_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_MAP_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return MAP_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return CONSUMER_CONFIG_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_MAP_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return MAP_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please revert re-format.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please revert re-format.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
No, you didn't. Change is still there.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
No, you didn't. Change is still there.
Those changes are compare to the changes which are not correct I commit before...
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
No, you didn't. Change is still there.
I dont't know why.... I check out the original branch and copy the codes into the class file, but the IDE says that there is no difference.....
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
No, you didn't. Change is still there.
Resolved
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Map<TopicPartition, List<ConsumerRecord<?, ?>>> rsp = new HashMap<>(); | ||
| if (retObj instanceof ConsumerRecords) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why instanceof? Is there another case to have another parameter? The parent class has Map<TopicPartition, List<ConsumerRecord<?, ?>>> type as the parameter, but it should not affect this new Kafka37ConsumerInterceptor, right?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This class should be removed, I missed it, I'll delete it at next commit
Sorry, something went wrong.
All the CIs were successfully executed but the DeadLink check |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@kezhenxu94 As 403 respond code, should we add this into ignore list? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return CONSUMER_CONFIG_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_MAP_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return MAP_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return CONSUMER_CONFIG_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| new ConstructorInterceptPoint() { | ||
| @Override | ||
| public ElementMatcher<MethodDescription> getConstructorMatcher() { | ||
| return takesArgumentWithType(0, CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPT_MAP_TYPE); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public String getConstructorInterceptor() { | ||
| return MAP_CONSTRUCTOR_INTERCEPTOR_CLASS; | ||
| } | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have already recerted it, this class dosen't change, I have already rollback it to the original version
No, you didn't. Change is still there.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| import org.apache.skywalking.apm.agent.core.plugin.match.ClassMatch; | ||
| import static org.apache.skywalking.apm.agent.core.plugin.match.NameMatch.byName; | ||
|
|
||
| /** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the comment, I think we can focus on the difference instead of repeating what is already written in the parent class.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the comment, I think we can focus on the difference instead of repeating what is already written in the parent class.
Yes, the difference is the method named pollForFetchs was removed from KafkaConsumer to another two classes, so the original interceptor can not intercept it. Because of the enhance class is changed, so I create two new classes to repair the uncompatible problem.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the difference is the method named pollForFetchs was removed from KafkaConsumer to another two classes, so the original interceptor can not intercept it. Because of the enhance class is changed, so I create two new classes to repair the uncompatible problem.
I meant you can modify the comment for this class......
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right, I forget to change the comment
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
One more. changes.md should be updated as well. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.