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

Refactor to highlight materialization query execution model #5079

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 30, 2023

Conversation

adamretter
Copy link
Contributor

Backported from FusionDB - Just some small cleanup and refactoring to make future changes easier. Should not break any backwards compatibility or change anything in execution.

@adamretter adamretter added the enhancement new features, suggestions, etc. label Oct 8, 2023
@adamretter adamretter added this to the eXist-7.0.0 milestone Oct 8, 2023
@adamretter adamretter requested review from dizzzz and reinhapa October 8, 2023 21:05
@adamretter adamretter force-pushed the refactor/query-materialization branch from be5ac32 to 9af416b Compare October 9, 2023 14:53
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Oct 9, 2023

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 16 Code Smells

82.7% 82.7% Coverage
2.0% 2.0% Duplication

@line-o
Copy link
Member

line-o commented Oct 9, 2023

What is this PR wants to highlight. It is not immediately clear to me from its description. @adamretter could you clarify that?

@adamretter
Copy link
Contributor Author

What is this PR wants to highlight. It is not immediately clear to me from its description. @adamretter could you clarify that?

@line-o It highlights where the Marterialization Query Execution Model is used.

*
* @throws XPathException if an error occurs during evaluation.
*/
Sequence eval(@Nullable Sequence contextSequence, @Nullable Item contextItem) throws XPathException;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wonder why you did not choose to have two method definitions, where the second one could have just one parameter (internally using null). this would have avoided a lot of small code changes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@dizzzz That is what we had previously. I wanted to simplify this so that there was a single clean interface.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I miss.... where is this interface used?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@line-o line-o requested a review from a team October 16, 2023 21:40
@adamretter adamretter force-pushed the refactor/query-materialization branch from 9af416b to 7b80363 Compare October 29, 2023 20:58
@dizzzz dizzzz merged commit 85a4709 into eXist-db:develop Oct 30, 2023
4 of 9 checks passed
@adamretter
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks you @dizzzz :-)

@line-o
Copy link
Member

line-o commented Oct 30, 2023

@dizzz I wonder why this was merged even though 5 checks are failing.

@dizzzz
Copy link
Member

dizzzz commented Oct 31, 2023

I merged as the issues were not unique to this branch.

@adamretter adamretter deleted the refactor/query-materialization branch November 28, 2024 16:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement new features, suggestions, etc.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants