Hi
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/3089
Check please
2017-01-10 18:42 GMT+04:00 Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org>:
> I think the code has been refactored many times since then.
>
> If the code of the tests is really the same I'm okay with deleting the
> duplicate method.
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for looking into this! I think we can put in the fix and remove one
>> of the tests, yes.
>>
>> @Robert What do you think? I think you initially added this test a loooong
>> while back.
>>
>> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 at 20:11 Alexey Demin <diomi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I am trying make small review for slow test and I found small issue:
>> >
>> > NonReusingReOpenableHashTableITCase
>> >
>> > testSpillingHashJoinWithMassiveCollisions
>> > testSpillingHashJoinWithTwoRecursions
>> >
>> >
>> > for testSpillingHashJoinWithTwoRecursions exist description
>> >
>> > /*
>> > * This test is basically identical to the
>> > "testSpillingHashJoinWithMassiveCollisions" test, only that the number
>> > * of repeated values (causing bucket collisions) are large enough to
>> make
>> > sure that their target partition no longer
>> > * fits into memory by itself and needs to be repartitioned in the
>> > recursion again.
>> > */
>> >
>> > but he incorrect, because code of both test fully equal,
>> > one difference line very similar on bug after refactoring with inserting
>> > recordReuse
>> >
>> > testSpillingHashJoinWithMassiveCollisions
>> > 353 while ((record = buildSide.next(record)) != null) {
>> >
>> > (f51f1b4 19.03.14, 1:17 Aljoscha Krettek* Change MutableObjectIterator
>> to
>> > allow immutable objects)
>> >
>> >
>> > Aljoscha, can we remove one test and fix buildSide.next(record) to
>> > buildSide.next(recordReuse) ?
>> >
>> > P.S. I started review because we have a lot of failing test due to cpu
>> > time limit
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Alexey
>> >
>>
>
>
