Details
-
Bug
-
Status: Resolved
-
Normal
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Normal
Description
Discovered by benedict while reviewing CASSANDRA-13747:
While reviewing I got a little suspicious of the modified line DataResolver :479, as it seemed that n and x were the wrong way around... and, reading the comment of intent directly above, and reproducing the calculation, they are indeed.
This is probably a significant enough bug that it warrants its own ticket for record keeping, though I'm fairly agnostic on that decision.
I'm a little concerned about our current short read behaviour, as right now it seems we should be requesting exactly one row, for any size of under-read, which could mean extremely poor performance in case of large under-reads.
I would suggest that the outer unconditional Math.max is a bad idea, has been (poorly) insulating us from this error, and that we should first be asserting that the calculation yields a value >= 0 before setting to 1.
Attachments
Issue Links
- is related to
-
CASSANDRA-13747 Fix AssertionError in short read protection
- Resolved