[Minor] Update documents in-line with doc standards#926
[Minor] Update documents in-line with doc standards#926jerryshao merged 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
Code Coverage Report
|
| | `gravitino.entity.store.kv` | Detailed implementation of Kv storage, currently supported is `RocksDB` storage implementation `RocksDBKvBackend`. | `RocksDBKvBackend` | 0.1.0 | | ||
| | `gravitino.entity.store.kv.rocksdbPath` | Directory path of `RocksDBKvBackend`, **It's highly recommend that you change this default value** as it's under the deploy directory and future version upgrades may remove it. | `${GRAVITINO_HOME}/data/rocksdb` | 0.1.0 | | ||
| | `gravitino.entity.store.maxTransactionSkewTimeMs` | The maximum skew time of transactions in milliseconds. | `2000` | 0.3.0 | | ||
| | `gravitino.entity.store.kv.deleteAfterTimeMs` | The maximum time in milliseconds that the deleted data and old version data is kept. Set to at least 10 minutes and no longer than 30 days. | `604800000`(7 days) | 0.3.0 | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We also have configuration doc in code, we should also change them to align to the doc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we want the document standard to apply to Java docs? That would be a large amount of work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think so. We should align the configuration doc both in code and doc, otherwise it has differences as code/doc evolves.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IT would be better if we had a single source of truth and had the code refer to the docs or vice versa. If we have it in two places it is likely to get out of sync.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, it will be out of sync, but currently we don't have better ways to be SSOT. Why not align them in this version, and we can find out better solution in the next version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please point me to where this is in the code? Searching on gravitino.entity.store.kv etc etc fails to find any similar configuration mentioned in the code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@justinmclean the current configuration-related code spreads into many places, I can help you to modify the code part.
…es (#989) ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR proposes to add code change to align with #926 doc change. ### Why are the changes needed? Without this change, there will be a discrepancy between doc and code. Fix: #979 ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? Existing UTs.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Update documents in-line with doc standards, mostly fixing title and passive voice.
Why are the changes needed?
For consitancy.
Fix: # N/A
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
N/A
How was this patch tested?
Built locally.