[improve][ml] Use correct isActive method for cursor - #19322
Merged
lhotari merged 2 commits intoJan 26, 2023
Conversation
…or is active (apache#19159)" This reverts commit 78ea7f0.
michaeljmarshall
added
doc-not-needed
michaeljmarshall
requested review from
AnonHxy,
HQebupt,
gaozhangmin,
lhotari and
nodece
January 25, 2023 06:41
15 tasks
lhotari
approved these changes
Jan 25, 2023
AnonHxy
approved these changes
Jan 26, 2023
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation
In #19159, we made a change motivated by simplifying the code. However, one problem is that it changed the level of abstraction by calling the
ManagedCursorclass, which could technically have a different definition ofisActive. In order to retain the original meaning, I am reverting that PR and using a method in theManagedLedgerImplclass to simplify the code.Other relevant context: #19159 (review) and #19159 (comment)
Modifications
isCursorActivemethod instead.Verifying this change
This is a return to the previous state with a cosmetic change, so the current test coverage should suffice.
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
No breaking changes.
Documentation
doc-not-neededMatching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: skipping the PR