Skip to content
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.

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

Feature/bulkprocessor #564

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Dec 18, 2020
Merged

Feature/bulkprocessor #564

merged 6 commits into from
Dec 18, 2020

Conversation

michaelsoubra
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@MiniPlayer MiniPlayer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I leaved some comments to improve code (to my point of view). Did not check
code of AsyncCallRequestBulkPostJson.java though.
Saw nothing so important to change, so we can merge the PR.

if the record contains one of the tag of the property with one of the value for this tag it will return true
*/
Boolean triggerRestCall(Record record, ProcessContext context) {
List<Boolean> resultContainer = new ArrayList<>();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why using a list of boolean ? We could just return true as soon as a tag match

@@ -213,6 +237,62 @@ void modifyRecord(Record record, Record rsp) {
return Optional.empty();
}

ArrayList<Optional<String>> concatBody(Collection<Record> records, ProcessContext context) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This method does not seem general to me. I mean it is usefull only for a specific case so I wonder why it is in AbstractCallRequest. And this method is currently used only in one processor so there is no reason to have this method in AbstractCallRequest (which should really be general)

Comment on lines +433 to +434
<arg>-Xmax-classfile-name</arg>
<arg>140</arg>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe a comment explaining why this is needed would have been nice

@MiniPlayer MiniPlayer merged commit 9ad85be into release/v1.4.0 Dec 18, 2020
@MiniPlayer MiniPlayer deleted the feature/bulkprocessor branch December 18, 2020 08:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants