-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
Generate and add _id field in Doc if not passed #32
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
55f0ffa
Generate and add _id field in Doc if not passed
tatu-at-datastax 9d05130
mvn fmt:format
tatu-at-datastax 027e0e0
Merge branch 'main' into tatu/28-add-id-field-to-doc
tatu-at-datastax f8a5cdf
Minor Javadoc comment change from review.
tatu-at-datastax 89b5e5b
mvn fmt:format
tatu-at-datastax 5c967ac
Merge branch 'main' into tatu/28-add-id-field-to-doc
tatu-at-datastax 66f9df0
Fix one of 1 IT failures
tatu-at-datastax 598e6da
And fix the other IT, now all pass from command-line
tatu-at-datastax File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need to remove id and add it back again to new document? Can just do docOb.get("_id") and later do docOb.put("_id", id)? So don't need to create new ObjectNode (docWithoutId and docWithId)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah. Forgot to add a note on that: while not mandatory, was thinking that we want to order things so that
_id
is always the first property. Just a preference, but I think this is what happens with Mongo.But there is also the additional complexity in traversal: code later on assumes that
_id
is not passed so there won't be index fields for it. So if it was not removed, more checks would be needed not to expose_id
via callbacks.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added note: underlying
ObjectNode
usesLinkedHashMap
to preserve ordering. While this is bit of an implementation detail it is very unlikely to change for Jackson (esp. 2.x) since changing that would be major compatibility change in practice.