mgmt, appservice redegisn #14890
mgmt, appservice redegisn #14890
Conversation
| public class BatchDeletionImpl { | ||
|
|
||
| @SuppressWarnings({"unchecked", "rawtypes"}) | ||
| public static Flux<String> deleteByIdsAsync(Collection<String> ids, | ||
| BiFunction<String, String, Mono<Void>> deleteByIdAsync) { | ||
| if (ids == null || ids.isEmpty()) { | ||
| return Flux.empty(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| Collection<Mono<String>> observables = new ArrayList<>(); | ||
| for (String id : ids) { | ||
| final String resourceGroupName = ResourceUtils.groupFromResourceId(id); | ||
| final String name = ResourceUtils.nameFromResourceId(id); | ||
| Mono<String> o = ReactorMapper.map(deleteByIdAsync.apply(resourceGroupName, name), id); | ||
| observables.add(o); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return Flux.mergeDelayError(32, observables.toArray(new Mono[0])); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added to reduce duplicate code. Plan to move same code from a few other classes to use this as well.
| } | ||
| } | ||
| this.webSiteBase = new WebSiteBaseImpl(inner()); | ||
| this.hostNameSslStateMap = new HashMap<>(this.webSiteBase.hostnameSslStates()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why this property remains?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In Update flow, code changes the Map to add new items.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Then should we just use it to save the update items?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. Hence I keep it there. I.e., WebSiteBase init the variable (instead of previous code in this method), then logic remains same as before.
...ppservice/src/main/java/com/azure/resourcemanager/appservice/implementation/WebAppsImpl.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| .flatMapDelayError(id -> { | ||
| final String resourceGroupName = ResourceUtils.groupFromResourceId(id); | ||
| final String name = ResourceUtils.nameFromResourceId(id); | ||
| return ReactorMapper.map(deleteByIdAsync.apply(resourceGroupName, name), id); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the deleteByIdAsync should take one string id rather than two strings (some resource will need more).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can easily overload it with same name, and take Function<String, Mono<Void>> for this case (I actually wrote this signature first, then changed it since most case it is resourceGroupName+name).
| @@ -124,4 +134,48 @@ public FunctionAppImpl define(String name) { | |||
| public Mono<Void> deleteByResourceGroupAsync(String groupName, String name) { | |||
| return this.inner().deleteAsync(groupName, name); | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Override | |||
| public Flux<String> deleteByIdsAsync(Collection<String> ids) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For delete operations, do the users need Flux as return type?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a list of IDs that got deleted. As method with DelayError, error will be after Flux of IDs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Got it. So users would get IDs returned, which are success deletion, and errors if applicable returned after all completed.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public Mono<FunctionApp> refreshAsync() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just curious, why name it refresh on a get call?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To make it like other common resource instance, e.g.FunctionApp, which implement a Refreshable<FunctionApp> https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-java/blob/master/sdk/resourcemanager/azure-resourcemanager-resources/src/main/java/com/azure/resourcemanager/resources/fluentcore/model/Refreshable.java, which refresh() method updates itself and return a FunctionApp instance (actually just this).
And here FunctionAppBasic has same refresh() method to update itself, and return a more complete FunctionApp instance.
add track 2 information to authorization RP (Azure#14890)
fix Azure/azure-libraries-for-java#1246