Transactional md5 #5947
Transactional md5 #5947
Conversation
rickle-msft
requested review from
alzimmermsft,
gapra-msft,
jaschrep-msft and
sima-zhu
as code owners
| @@ -91,7 +91,11 @@ public AzureBlobStorageImpl build() { | |||
| if (this.url != null) { | |||
| client.setUrl(this.url); | |||
| } | |||
| client.setVersion(this.version); | |||
| if (this.version != null) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We allow customer to customize the service version through builder.
If not specified, this "2019=02-02"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is done by codegen and functionally does the same thing our hand crafted builders do
rickle-msft
requested review from
conniey,
mssfang and
srnagar
as code owners
| @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ class APISpec extends Specification { | |||
|
|
|||
| static final String garbageLeaseID = UUID.randomUUID().toString() | |||
|
|
|||
| public static final String defaultEndpointTemplate = "https://%s.blob.core.windows.net/" | |||
| public static final String defaultEndpointTemplate = "http://%s.blob.core.windows.net/" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice catch. Thanks
| @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ autorest --use=C:/work/autorest.java --use=C:/work/autorest.modeler --version=2. | |||
|
|
|||
| ### Code generation settings | |||
| ``` yaml | |||
| input-file: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/storage-dataplane-preview/specification/storage/data-plane/Microsoft.BlobStorage/preview/2019-02-02/blob.json | |||
| input-file: https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/ab914bf38cf5afc78f09b163ca42f593dec84472/specification/storage/data-plane/Microsoft.BlobStorage/preview/2019-02-02/blob.json | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Which swagger do we want to point to? Were the changes merged into the main swagger branch?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think want to point to the HEAD of the branch.
| @@ -199,32 +199,37 @@ | |||
| * | |||
| * <p><strong>Code Samples</strong></p> | |||
| * | |||
| * {@codesnippet com.azure.storage.blob.specialized.AppendBlobAsyncClient.appendBlockWithResponse#Flux-long-AppendBlobAccessConditions} | |||
| * {@codesnippet com.azure.storage.blob.specialized.AppendBlobAsyncClient.appendBlockWithResponse#Flux-long-byte-AppendBlobAccessConditions} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@alzimmermsft is this the correct syntax to use for a byte array in these code snippet tags?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's the same as what was used in appendBlockFromURL, which already supported this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the correct syntax, generics and array types use the fix keyword only (byte[] -> byte, Flux -> Flux).
|
@rickle-msft is there any thing remaining here other than 'Squash and merge'? Thanks! 😄 |
|
/azp run java - storage - ci |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azp run java - storage - ci |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azp run java - storage - ci |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
@jianghaolu could you help take a look at this CI failure with Azure.Identity.DeviceCodeCredentialTest https://dev.azure.com/azure-sdk/public/_build/results?buildId=172030&view=logs&j=acd39e86-e698-5a60-1b88-c3e97f07b09a&t=9434261b-f861-55ea-b2fe-7ad88c9831af&l=206 |
|
CI error: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM crash or System.exit called? Seems transient, but re-running seems to be not working thus closing and re-opening the PR. |
No description provided.