-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.5k
Fix nullness errors in SimpleDoFnRunner and DoFnInvoker #35029
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
Fix nullness errors in SimpleDoFnRunner and DoFnInvoker #35029
Conversation
838bc5c to
3d608d3
Compare
|
Checks are failing. Will not request review until checks are succeeding. If you'd like to override that behavior, comment |
|
Assigning reviewers: R: @m-trieu for label java. Note: If you would like to opt out of this review, comment Available commands:
The PR bot will only process comments in the main thread (not review comments). |
|
Reviewers are already assigned to this PR: @m-trieu |
|
Friendly ping - this should be a quick and easy review. Mostly just adding null checks and annotation to reduce null checks. |
|
assign to next reviewer |
|
assign set of reviewers |
|
Reviewers are already assigned to this PR: @m-trieu |
|
R: @Abacn Can I ask you to look at this? Since they are core Java SDK pieces. |
|
Stopping reviewer notifications for this pull request: review requested by someone other than the bot, ceding control. If you'd like to restart, comment |
|
This pull request has been marked as stale due to 60 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 1 week if no further activity occurs. If you think that’s incorrect or this pull request requires a review, please simply write any comment. If closed, you can revive the PR at any time and @mention a reviewer or discuss it on the [email protected] list. Thank you for your contributions. |
|
Not stale - I'll resolve the conflict but the main changes here are going to be about the same. |
|
sorry missed that. Taking a look. Since this is a pretty common code path and in the past there were occurrences checkstyle fix had introduced unintended issue, I suggest check it in after release cut (so we get time to have all tests exercised) |
3d608d3 to
f07ca33
Compare
|
I can also add trigger files, but this potentially touches so much it probably just makes sense to merge and rollback if there is a problem. |
|
Well, I wouldn't say it "touches so much". I didn't actually refactor anything, just added checks and annotations mostly this time. But what I mean is "there is so much downstream of this". |
|
Flake in :runners:java-fn-execution:test org.apache.beam.runners.fnexecution.logging.GrpcLoggingServiceTest. testMultipleClientsFailingIsHandledGracefullyByServer |
|
got it rebased and green |
|
friendly ping |
Abacn
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sorry for the delay, this lgtm. Retriggering the test (in order to run the PR merging onto current HEAD)
Just fixing up a couple files I touched in the course of my daily work. There are a number of helper commits in this PR that I want to keep separate as there's no need to roll them back, and it will make the commit history cleaner for people looking at particular files.
Thank you for your contribution! Follow this checklist to help us incorporate your contribution quickly and easily:
addresses #123), if applicable. This will automatically add a link to the pull request in the issue. If you would like the issue to automatically close on merging the pull request, commentfixes #<ISSUE NUMBER>instead.CHANGES.mdwith noteworthy changes.See the Contributor Guide for more tips on how to make review process smoother.
To check the build health, please visit https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/master/.test-infra/BUILD_STATUS.md
GitHub Actions Tests Status (on master branch)
See CI.md for more information about GitHub Actions CI or the workflows README to see a list of phrases to trigger workflows.