[#5329] improvement(core): Clarify exception when importing entity multiple times #5844
Conversation
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
|
lgtm |
jerryshao
reviewed
Dec 16, 2024
| } catch (EntityAlreadyExistsException e) { | ||
| LOG.error("Failed to import schema {} with id {} to the store.", identifier, uid, e); | ||
| throw new UnsupportedOperationException( | ||
| "The schema is already managed by another catalog and cannot be loaded by the current catalog."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please add more words to describe the cause here, also suggesting users how to resolve or avoid this problem?
jerryshao
approved these changes
Dec 17, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Why are the changes needed?
Fix: #5329
import one source multiple times will update the existing record and result in unexpected behaviors
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
yes, clarify the exception
How was this patch tested?
tests added