Skip to content

MINIFICPP-2845 - Monotonic provenance event identifiers, iterations support, refactor#2209

Draft
adamdebreceni wants to merge 4 commits into
apache:mainfrom
adamdebreceni:MINIFICPP-2845
Draft

MINIFICPP-2845 - Monotonic provenance event identifiers, iterations support, refactor#2209
adamdebreceni wants to merge 4 commits into
apache:mainfrom
adamdebreceni:MINIFICPP-2845

Conversation

@adamdebreceni

@adamdebreceni adamdebreceni commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Depends on #2195

Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi - MiNiFi C++.

In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you to ensure the following steps have been taken:

For all changes:

  • Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the commit message?

  • Does your PR title start with MINIFICPP-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.

  • Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically main)?

  • Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?

For code changes:

  • If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?
  • If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file?
  • If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file?

For documentation related changes:

  • Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered?

Note:

Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check GitHub Actions CI results for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.

}

Identifier& Identifier::operator++() {
for (int byte_idx = 15; byte_idx >= 0 && ++data_[byte_idx] == 0; --byte_idx) {}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a bit too dense and clever for my liking, I'd separate the iteration from the rest of the increment + carry logic.

Suggested change
for (int byte_idx = 15; byte_idx >= 0 && ++data_[byte_idx] == 0; --byte_idx) {}
// increment with carry
for (int byte_idx = 15; byte_idx >= 0; --byte_idx) {
++data_[byte_idx];
if (data_[byte_idx] != 0) {
break;
}
}

class SchedulingAgent {
public:
SchedulingAgent(const gsl::not_null<core::controller::ControllerServiceProvider*> controller_service_provider, std::shared_ptr<core::Repository> repo, std::shared_ptr<core::Repository> flow_repo,
SchedulingAgent(const gsl::not_null<core::controller::ControllerServiceProvider*> controller_service_provider, std::shared_ptr<provenance::ProvenanceRepository> repo, std::shared_ptr<core::Repository> flow_repo,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe the "repo" naming of identifiers that have to be provenance repo was a mistake. I'm glad the type makes it clearer now, but I'd change the parameter and member names too. provenance_repo or prov_repo seem like good options to me.

Comment on lines +49 to +51
Identifier& operator++();
Identifier operator++(int);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we need these UUID increments? I believe the Identified class is not meant to represent integer auto-increment keys.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants