sanpwc commented on code in PR #4821:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/4821#discussion_r1893847419
##########
modules/raft-api/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/raft/Command.java:
##########
@@ -17,10 +17,27 @@
package org.apache.ignite.internal.raft;
+import org.apache.ignite.internal.hlc.HybridTimestamp;
import org.apache.ignite.internal.network.NetworkMessage;
+import org.jetbrains.annotations.Nullable;
/**
* A marker interface for replication group command.
*/
public interface Command extends NetworkMessage {
+ /**
+ * This is called before a command is submitted to replication pipeline.
+ *
+ * @param safeTs Safe timestamp.
+ */
+ default void patch(HybridTimestamp safeTs) {}
Review Comment:
> We already have this concept.
Well, thats true. However you are currently reworking the logic. Why not to
remove 'ugly' part of the code.
> No known to me thread safety issues exist in the PR.
Reading safeTime anyware besides raft linearised logic isn't thread safe.
Meaning that if i'll read original command.safeTime that was created on the
Replica side I may not see patched value. I don't think that currently anyone
does that, however it's just fragile. At least you may add a comment to
safeTime getter explaining that it's not thread safe.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
