Remove the conjure-java-jersey-server dependency #6213
Conversation
This was only needed for WebPreconditions, which wasn't actually needed since we were not checking any Jersey exceptions.
| Preconditions.checkArgument( | ||
| TableReference.isFullyQualifiedName(tableName), | ||
| "Table name is not fully qualified", | ||
| UnsafeArg.of("tableName", tableName)); | ||
| return TableReference.createFromFullyQualifiedName(tableName); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: we should clean up TableReference to use the com.palantir.logsafe.Preconditions instead of Guava, then we could get rid of this getTableRef(String) method and just inline the TableReference.createFromFullyQualifiedName(tableName)
public static TableReference createFromFullyQualifiedName(String fullTableName) {
int index = fullTableName.indexOf('.');
Preconditions.checkArgument(
index > 0, "Table name is not a fully qualified table name.", UnsafeArg.of("tableName", fullTableName));
return create(
Namespace.create(fullTableName.substring(0, index), Namespace.UNCHECKED_NAME),
fullTableName.substring(index + 1));
}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have errorprones which will automatically perform that migration?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Negative Ghostrider. I ran ./gradlew compileJava compileTestJava -PerrorProneApply=PreferSafeLoggingPreconditions against develop but that didn't generate any changes as I imagine since the aren't Args we're hitting the path without suggested fix. Separately we could make that smarter and generate UnsafeArgs, but don't think we should block on this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Draft PR #6223 to migrate more Guava -> logsafe Preconditions
schlosna
requested review from
jeremyk-91,
Jolyon-S,
sudiksha27 and
mdaudali
| Preconditions.checkArgument( | ||
| TableReference.isFullyQualifiedName(tableName), | ||
| "Table name is not fully qualified", | ||
| UnsafeArg.of("tableName", tableName)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you can use LoggingArgs.safeInternalTableName here.
| "Table requested to sweep %s does not exist", | ||
| tableName); | ||
| "Table requested to sweep does not exist", | ||
| UnsafeArg.of("tableName", tableName)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LoggingArgs.safeInternalTableName
…jure-jersey-dependency
bulldozer-bot
bot
deleted the
feature/remove-conjure-jersey-dependency
branch
|
Threw some metrics on https://github.com/palantir/atlasdb/compare/ds/flakes?expand=1 to measure whats slow and filed #6226. Locally the test runs for me in ~3 seconds but in circle its ~11 seconds so hopefully the 15 second timeout handles the common flakes and we can look into making it faster as well. |
General
Before this PR:
After this PR:
==COMMIT_MSG==
Remove the conjure-java-jersey-server dependency
This was only needed for WebPreconditions, which wasn't actually
needed since we were not checking any Jersey exceptions.
==COMMIT_MSG==
Priority:
Concerns / possible downsides (what feedback would you like?):
Is documentation needed?:
Compatibility
Does this PR create any API breaks (e.g. at the Java or HTTP layers) - if so, do we have compatibility?:
Does this PR change the persisted format of any data - if so, do we have forward and backward compatibility?:
The code in this PR may be part of a blue-green deploy. Can upgrades from previous versions safely coexist? (Consider restarts of blue or green nodes.):
Does this PR rely on statements being true about other products at a deployment - if so, do we have correct product dependencies on these products (or other ways of verifying that these statements are true)?:
Does this PR need a schema migration?
Testing and Correctness
What, if any, assumptions are made about the current state of the world? If they change over time, how will we find out?:
What was existing testing like? What have you done to improve it?:
If this PR contains complex concurrent or asynchronous code, is it correct? The onus is on the PR writer to demonstrate this.:
If this PR involves acquiring locks or other shared resources, how do we ensure that these are always released?:
Execution
How would I tell this PR works in production? (Metrics, logs, etc.):
Has the safety of all log arguments been decided correctly?:
Will this change significantly affect our spending on metrics or logs?:
How would I tell that this PR does not work in production? (monitors, etc.):
If this PR does not work as expected, how do I fix that state? Would rollback be straightforward?:
If the above plan is more complex than “recall and rollback”, please tag the support PoC here (if it is the end of the week, tag both the current and next PoC):
Scale
Would this PR be expected to pose a risk at scale? Think of the shopping product at our largest stack.:
Would this PR be expected to perform a large number of database calls, and/or expensive database calls (e.g., row range scans, concurrent CAS)?:
Would this PR ever, with time and scale, become the wrong thing to do - and if so, how would we know that we need to do something differently?:
Development Process
Where should we start reviewing?:
If this PR is in excess of 500 lines excluding versions lock-files, why does it not make sense to split it?:
Please tag any other people who should be aware of this PR:
@jeremyk-91
@sverma30
@raiju