[CONTROLLER-1774] Data Tree: For merge operation updates sent for keys Created: 19/Sep/17 Updated: 25/Jul/23 Resolved: 22/Jan/19 |
|
| Status: | Resolved |
| Project: | controller |
| Component/s: | mdsal |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | ||
| Reporter: | Josh Hershberg | Assignee: | Josh Hershberg |
| Resolution: | Won't Do | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Environment: |
Operating System: All |
||
| External issue ID: | 9179 |
| Description |
|
Assume you modify an object in a DS. You need to specify the key even though you do not mean to modify it (it's immutable anyway) but you would not expect to see a WRITE notification for the leaf node that is also the key. And yet it comes. This behavior did not exist in the old "non-tree" infrastructure. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Josh Hershberg [ 19/Sep/17 ] |
|
NB: It would appear that this is not specific to the key but in general the new infra does not check whether or not something actally changed and considers anything in the merged object as a write. I think this can be handled differently for keys which you have no choice but to specify. Perhaps there is room to differentiate between setKey and setWhateverTheNameOfTheFieldIs where if you call setKey it's not considered to be a write. Anyway, it's supposed to be immutable, no? |
| Comment by Tom Pantelis [ 11/Jun/18 ] |
|
I'm not following exactly what this Jira item is about. Can you provide detailed example (s)? Re: "This behavior did not exist in the old "non-tree" infrastructure" and "the new infra" - what are you referring to? AD-SAL, ie pre-MD-SAL? |
| Comment by Tom Pantelis [ 05/Oct/18 ] |
|
Josh - can you clarify this Jira further and determine if there's anything actionable needed? |