Fix getblocks long #19078
Fix getblocks long #19078
Conversation
Regenerated with new swagger to present block size on a GetBlocks call as long instead of int, while preserving backwards compatibility. Currently build error CS0282 due to a mix of generated and handwritten properties.
Moved all BlobBlock properties into handwritten partial file to avoid compile error CS0282.
jaschrep-msft
requested review from
amishra-dev,
amnguye,
kasobol-msft,
seanmcc-msft and
tg-msft
as code owners
ghost
added
the
|
Need to pull this change in an environment that can handle a put block this big to verify. |
| [Test] | ||
| [Explicit] | ||
| [Ignore("https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-net/issues/12312")] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please make this test LiveOnly. We've invested quite a bit in fine tuning of live test runtime that this shouldn't be problem anymore (and if it is we'll keep fine tuning rather than disabling coverage).
| @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Run `dotnet build /t:GenerateCode` to generate code. | |||
|
|
|||
| ``` yaml | |||
| input-file: | |||
| - https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/011761be1285d14feb41796b5d97df1126495c5c/specification/storage/data-plane/Microsoft.BlobStorage/preview/2020-06-12/blob.json | |||
| - https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/8c1f9b739165035d9ced32761cebb19125bce233/specification/storage/data-plane/Microsoft.BlobStorage/preview/2020-06-12/blob.json | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it not matter if it's the link to the raw format?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I managed to generate off it, though I'll change back just in case.
|
/azp run net - storage - tests |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
| /// supported values. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)] | ||
| public int Size => checked((int)SizeLong); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What does checked do? Ensure we didn’t wrap around?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah. Without this, the extra bits are just discarded. Here, we actually throw the OverflowException.
|
Build Analyze CI step is failing. To fix, re-generate. I think this might be being caused by the url you are using in Blob autorest.md. It’s also possible we need to re-generate for one or more of the other Storage packages. |
|
This pull request is protected by Check Enforcer. What is Check Enforcer?Check Enforcer helps ensure all pull requests are covered by at least one check-run (typically an Azure Pipeline). When all check-runs associated with this pull request pass then Check Enforcer itself will pass. Why am I getting this message?You are getting this message because Check Enforcer did not detect any check-runs being associated with this pull request within five minutes. This may indicate that your pull request is not covered by any pipelines and so Check Enforcer is correctly blocking the pull request being merged. What should I do now?If the check-enforcer check-run is not passing and all other check-runs associated with this PR are passing (excluding license-cla) then you could try telling Check Enforcer to evaluate your pull request again. You can do this by adding a comment to this pull request as follows: What if I am onboarding a new service?Often, new services do not have validation pipelines associated with them. In order to bootstrap pipelines for a new service, please perform following steps: For data-plane/track 2 SDKs Issue the following command as a pull request comment:
For track 1 management-plane SDKsPlease open a separate PR and to your service SDK path in this file. Once that PR has been merged, you can re-run the pipeline to trigger the verification. |
|
/azp run net - storage - ci |
|
Pull request contains merge conflicts. |
…nto fix-getblocks-long
Incorporates Azure/azure-rest-api-specs#13188.
All properties in BlobBlock moved to handwritten class due to compile errors regarding properties across partial structs. Facade property maintained for backwards compatibility.