TINKERPOP-3100 Fix problem in recursive calls to Traversal lock() #3152
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
VOTE +1 |
1 similar comment
|
VOTE +1 |
|
VOTE +1 (pending actions passing) |
This was done because jdk8 could not compile the deep traversal tests that were used in testing. Adding the benchmarks and tests used to develop this work back since jdk8 is not an issue for 3.8.x.
spmallette
force-pushed
the
TINKERPOP-3100
branch
from
4267208 to
bd338db
Compare
|
Updated description around the build failures....... |
|
@spmallette This should be good to rebase and merge now that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3172 is in. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-3100
Drastically improves the performance of lock() as you lose the excessive recursion and avoid having to reidentify steps repeatedly.
after
Messily merged this to 3.7-dev with 98ffa44 and removed the "deep" traversal tests/benchmarks because jdk8 wouldn't compile that code for some reason. works fine for jdk11/17. code is good for jdk8 when the traversal can compile so that performance fix still landed there. retargeted this PR to 3.8-dev where JDK8 is expected to be dropped and put the "deep" test/benchmarks back. This can merge after the JDK8 change goes in.
VOTE +1