MINOR: Refactored gap window names in share partition#20411
Merged
Conversation
| @@ -1181,7 +1182,7 @@ public void testMaybeInitializeAndAcquire() { | |||
| assertEquals(RecordState.ACQUIRED, sharePartition.cachedState().get(26L).batchState()); | |||
| assertEquals(30L, sharePartition.endOffset()); | |||
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |||
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the persisterReadResultGapWindow should be null. |
| @@ -1279,7 +1280,7 @@ public void testMaybeInitializeAndAcquireWithHigherMaxFetchRecords() { | |||
| assertEquals(RecordState.ACQUIRED, sharePartition.cachedState().get(31L).batchState()); | |||
| assertEquals(49L, sharePartition.endOffset()); | |||
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |||
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the persisterReadResultGapWindow should be null. |
| @@ -1591,7 +1592,7 @@ public void testMaybeInitializeAndAcquireWithMultipleBatches() { | |||
| assertEquals(RecordState.ACQUIRED, sharePartition.cachedState().get(26L).batchState()); | |||
| assertEquals(49L, sharePartition.endOffset()); | |||
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |||
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the initialReadGapOffset should be null. | |
| // As all the gaps are now filled, the persisterReadResultGapWindow should be null. |
Collaborator
|
LGTM, just some minor comment changes suggested above. |
AndrewJSchofield
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2025
AndrewJSchofield
left a comment
AndrewJSchofield
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the refactor. This makes more sense with the new names. lgtm
eduwercamacaro
pushed a commit
to littlehorse-enterprises/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 12, 2025
As per the suggestion by @adixitconfluent and @chirag-wadhwa5, [here](apache#20395 (comment)), I have refactored the code with variable and method names. Reviewers: Andrew Schofield <aschofield@confluent.io>, Chirag Wadhwa <cwadhwa@confluent.io>
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.
As per the suggestion by @adixitconfluent and @chirag-wadhwa5,
here,
I have refactored the code with variable and method names.
Reviewers: Andrew Schofield aschofield@confluent.io, Chirag Wadhwa
cwadhwa@confluent.io