Skip to content

TEST: avoid generating duplicate multiple fields #27080

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 23, 2017
Merged

TEST: avoid generating duplicate multiple fields #27080

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6859178
test: avoid generating duplicate multiple fields
dnhatn Oct 23, 2017
24e97d8
use interface type
dnhatn Oct 23, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/index/mapper/MultiFieldTests.java
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@

import java.io.IOException;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.HashSet;
import java.util.Map;

import static org.elasticsearch.common.xcontent.XContentFactory.jsonBuilder;
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -155,8 +156,9 @@ public void testBuildThenParse() throws Exception {
// can to unnecessary re-syncing of the mappings between the local instance and cluster state
public void testMultiFieldsInConsistentOrder() throws Exception {
String[] multiFieldNames = new String[randomIntBetween(2, 10)];
HashSet<String> seenFields = new HashSet<>();
Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor Oct 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's type the left-hand side as Set<String>.

Copy link
Member Author

@dnhatn dnhatn Oct 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, I prefer to have a concrete type for local variables. I will push the change.

Copy link
Member

@jasontedor jasontedor Oct 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the less-specific types are better when you can get away with them so that you do not come to rely on implementation details of the concrete type.

Copy link
Member Author

@dnhatn dnhatn Oct 23, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed!

for (int i = 0; i < multiFieldNames.length; i++) {
multiFieldNames[i] = randomAlphaOfLength(4);
multiFieldNames[i] = randomValueOtherThanMany(s -> !seenFields.add(s), () -> randomAlphaOfLength(4));
}

XContentBuilder builder = jsonBuilder().startObject().startObject("type").startObject("properties")
Expand Down