Depends on D3650
Adding logic for certain state options in order to properly handle sending logs to the backup service.
Details
Details
You need 3 terminals
1:
cd services yarn run-backup-service
2:
cd services yarn run-blob-service
3:
You can use https://github.com/karol-bisztyga/grpc-playground/tree/backup-async
./build.sh ./cmake/build/bin/client
then in the GUI use the n option (just type n and hit enter, this stands for creating a new backup).
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rCOMM Comm
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage
Event Timeline
| services/backup/docker-server/contents/server/src/Reactors/server/SendLogReactor.h | ||
|---|---|---|
| 163 | I'm wondering if it was a good idea to store either log or holder in value. Maybe the code would be more readable if we had two separate fields. What do you think? | |
| services/backup/docker-server/contents/server/src/Reactors/server/SendLogReactor.h | ||
|---|---|---|
| 163 | Well, maybe, Basically, this was agreed on during the arch review. Maybe you're right. If you feel like it, please create a task and assign it to me, we can discuss if it is a good change. | |
| services/backup/docker-server/contents/server/src/Reactors/server/SendLogReactor.h | ||
|---|---|---|
| 163 | It was just an idea. If you think it would simplify things, we can do this as a followup. If you're not convinced, then creating a task doesn't make a lot of sense. So up to you. But overall, you've written this code, so do you think that having separate fields would simplify the implementation? | |
| services/backup/docker-server/contents/server/src/Reactors/server/SendLogReactor.h | ||
|---|---|---|
| 163 |
It's true we agreed on using the same database field for these two values, but that doesn't mean we need to have the same variable for it in SendLogReactor. I agree with @palys-swm that it would be more readable to use different variables for these | |
| services/backup/docker-server/contents/server/src/Reactors/server/SendLogReactor.h | ||
|---|---|---|
| 163 | ||