Skip to content

IGNITE-28770 : Introduce a operation context attributes registry v2#13243

Open
Vladsz83 wants to merge 32 commits into
apache:masterfrom
Vladsz83:IGNITE-28770-Introduce-a-operation-context-attributes-registry_v2
Open

IGNITE-28770 : Introduce a operation context attributes registry v2#13243
Vladsz83 wants to merge 32 commits into
apache:masterfrom
Vladsz83:IGNITE-28770-Introduce-a-operation-context-attributes-registry_v2

Conversation

@Vladsz83

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

Comment thread modules/core/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/spi/discovery/tcp/ClientImpl.java Outdated
@petrov-mg

petrov-mg commented Jun 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

It's also worth adding meaningful comments describing the purpose of DistributedOperationContextManager and its methods.

What is DistributedOperationContextMessage and why was it decided to use a bitmap.

"join request (consider increasing 'joinTimeout' configuration property) " +
"[joinTimeout=" + spi.joinTimeout + ", sock=" + currSock + ']'));

if (msg instanceof TcpDiscoveryAbstractMessage msg0 && msg0.opCtxMsg != null) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's just leave the method as is, but wrap all of its code in a try-with-resource block.

@Vladsz83 Vladsz83 Jun 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I cannot wrap entire code because there would not be a message yet.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Obviously, that's not what I meant. Let's wrap the code related to processing of the message from the moment it is polled from the queue, but not move anything to other new methods.

In the current state of the code, moving the message handling logic into a separate method seems awkward. It's better to refactor this later in a separate ticket.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We've already moved message processing in a dedicated methods in same manner at other places. Message is a Object here, not even a Message. I need to check its type first. An if is required. That is why I introduce a method or did the processing in the part of code before.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants