)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":30858,"name":"zhen","email":"zhen00fa@gmail.com","username":"zhen"},"change_message_id":"bc05cdd23e2b7239b97d5584a613f42e2da4c53c","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"42029832_95033e4b","updated":"2022-05-21 07:36:41.000000000","message":"recheck","commit_id":"c4fc1be88b1337b11579081b87cc7d7ea77ca44f"},{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"02e038944bb3b0d3770a8923894b51d6ecefb81a","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":3,"id":"2fcd48c4_f4e2bf4d","updated":"2022-05-24 12:55:35.000000000","message":"Without too digging the described issue looks a bit similar too the one described here https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tooz/+/843017 .\n\nI\u0027m not a tooz expert so please can you have a look to this other patch and see if the problem fixed by it\u0027s other patch could be the root cause of your problem here.\n\nI don\u0027t know if the problem is the same and so if the solutions are the same. If the problem are similars I don\u0027t which is the good approach for now.\n\nThanks for your help.","commit_id":"dce2613aa154c7156f004d10be24415c38944eec"},{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"d76bcd6ac65de9d496e4f26d1a871cadcb9cb1dd","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":5,"id":"45071ead_fedf6034","updated":"2022-05-25 13:53:10.000000000","message":"Hello,\n\nSee my inline comment.\n\nPlease can add a release note too, to describe this fix and highlight this topic to the community.\n\nThanks by advance.","commit_id":"c0471fe71a4c7a6e77d3ce211eaac8a485794f34"},{"author":{"_account_id":30858,"name":"zhen","email":"zhen00fa@gmail.com","username":"zhen"},"change_message_id":"e4768972e150bf2d8b04bdc2838b490b03bb20bc","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":6,"id":"27e676ab_4ba923d0","updated":"2022-05-27 01:16:11.000000000","message":"recheck","commit_id":"6b2216ebcce5f699b51d7d10b4100eef2dcbd5d0"}],"tooz/drivers/memcached.py":[{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"d76bcd6ac65de9d496e4f26d1a871cadcb9cb1dd","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"            # NOTE(zhen): Whether \u0027was_deleted\u0027 was \u0027TRUE\u0027 or not,"},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"            # eventually we have to remove self from \u0027_acquired_locks\u0027."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"            was_deleted \u003d self.coord.client.delete(self.name, noreply\u003dFalse)"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"            self.coord._acquired_locks.remove(self)"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"            return was_deleted"},{"line_number":164,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"8ddc7b82_a9e03b76","line":161,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":12,"end_line":161,"end_character":76},"updated":"2022-05-25 13:53:10.000000000","message":"So do we still need to store the delete\u0027s result into `was_deleted`?\nAccording to your previous comment and according to fact that `was_deleted` seems to be no longer used after this point, I think we can avoid to store it, isn\u0027t?","commit_id":"c0471fe71a4c7a6e77d3ce211eaac8a485794f34"},{"author":{"_account_id":30858,"name":"zhen","email":"zhen00fa@gmail.com","username":"zhen"},"change_message_id":"60e657c23ea1c93c377e764e3a61002e6aa1a637","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"            # NOTE(zhen): Whether \u0027was_deleted\u0027 was \u0027TRUE\u0027 or not,"},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"            # eventually we have to remove self from \u0027_acquired_locks\u0027."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"            was_deleted \u003d self.coord.client.delete(self.name, noreply\u003dFalse)"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"            self.coord._acquired_locks.remove(self)"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"            return was_deleted"},{"line_number":164,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"fad7f311_a0831e9b","line":161,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":12,"end_line":161,"end_character":76},"in_reply_to":"34a8d1e2_50bf66c0","updated":"2022-07-15 06:20:42.000000000","message":"Done","commit_id":"c0471fe71a4c7a6e77d3ce211eaac8a485794f34"},{"author":{"_account_id":30858,"name":"zhen","email":"zhen00fa@gmail.com","username":"zhen"},"change_message_id":"29cee73e164471b750d46b6228c73f523a97c021","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"            # NOTE(zhen): Whether \u0027was_deleted\u0027 was \u0027TRUE\u0027 or not,"},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"            # eventually we have to remove self from \u0027_acquired_locks\u0027."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"            was_deleted \u003d self.coord.client.delete(self.name, noreply\u003dFalse)"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"            self.coord._acquired_locks.remove(self)"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"            return was_deleted"},{"line_number":164,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"8e3bd1a3_97e562e4","line":161,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":12,"end_line":161,"end_character":76},"in_reply_to":"8ddc7b82_a9e03b76","updated":"2022-05-26 09:09:59.000000000","message":"Appreciate for that comment.\nAccording to the previous code, lock.release() returns True on successful execution of \"self.coord.client.delete\". If \"self.coord.client.delete\" does not successfully delete the key, then others will be blocked when requesting the same key until the old key expires. So I think it\u0027s better to keep it this way? Is there any problem i never notice?","commit_id":"c0471fe71a4c7a6e77d3ce211eaac8a485794f34"},{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"cbc0d707a7fd72e6c47bee05afc3e2b0fc8b13ed","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":158,"context_line":"        else:"},{"line_number":159,"context_line":"            # NOTE(zhen): Whether \u0027was_deleted\u0027 was \u0027TRUE\u0027 or not,"},{"line_number":160,"context_line":"            # eventually we have to remove self from \u0027_acquired_locks\u0027."},{"line_number":161,"context_line":"            was_deleted \u003d self.coord.client.delete(self.name, noreply\u003dFalse)"},{"line_number":162,"context_line":"            self.coord._acquired_locks.remove(self)"},{"line_number":163,"context_line":"            return was_deleted"},{"line_number":164,"context_line":""}],"source_content_type":"text/x-python","patch_set":5,"id":"34a8d1e2_50bf66c0","line":161,"range":{"start_line":161,"start_character":12,"end_line":161,"end_character":76},"in_reply_to":"8e3bd1a3_97e562e4","updated":"2022-05-31 09:03:37.000000000","message":"Sorry I missed that we return this variable at the end of this method (at line 162 below). So yes keep it as it is.","commit_id":"c0471fe71a4c7a6e77d3ce211eaac8a485794f34"}]}