rpuch commented on code in PR #5187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/5187#discussion_r1948564890
##########
modules/partition-replicator/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/partition/replicator/raft/ZonePartitionRaftListener.java:
##########
@@ -124,6 +159,24 @@ private void
processWriteCommand(CommandClosure<WriteCommand> clo) {
clo.result(null);
}
+
+ // result == null means that the command either was not handled by
anyone (and clo.result() is called) or
+ // that it was delegated to a table processor (which called
clo.result()).
+
Review Comment:
I removed the blank line.
As for the duality, we have to use `clo.result()` by the delegates (as this
is imposed by the interface of RaftGroupListener that the delegates have), but
for local decisions it seems to be cleaner to use some `result` variable. Two
approaches don't agree, that's for sure. The best thing I was able to invent to
the moment is to leave that comment explaining the duality. Also, when we
switch to table processors completely, we'll change their interface to our own
that will agree with the 'returning' approach better.
--
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
