} catch (IllegalArgumentException expected) {
    }
  }

  public void testInitialCapacity_setTwice() {
    CacheBuilder<Object, Object> builder = CacheBuilder.newBuilder().initialCapacity(16);
    try {
      // even to the same value is not allowed
      builder.initialCapacity(16);
      fail();
    } catch (IllegalStateException expected) {
    }
  }

  @GwtIncompatible // CacheTesting

!!! tip
    If you manually call `app.openapi()`, you should update the `operationId`s before that.

!!! warning
    If you do this, you have to make sure each one of your *path operation functions* has a unique name.

    Even if they are in different modules (Python files).

## Exclude from OpenAPI

* Even dependencies can have dependencies, creating a hierarchy or **"graph" of dependencies**.
* All **automatically handled** by the framework.
* All the dependencies can require data from requests and **augment the path operation** constraints and automatic documentation.
* **Automatic validation** even for *path operation* parameters defined in dependencies.

configuration using e.g. the `mc admin config` commands you will need to adjust
your deployment.

Even though this change is backward compatible we do not expect that it affects
the vast majority of deployments in any negative way.

> Will an upgrade of an existing MinIO cluster impact the SLA of the cluster or will it even cause downtime?

No, an upgrade should not cause any downtime. However, on the first startup -

    # to be read from files and other types, but I'm not even sure it's a good idea
    # to support it as a first class "feature"
    assert is_bytes_sequence_annotation(Union[List[str], List[bytes]])


def test_is_uploadfile_sequence_annotation():
    # For coverage
    # TODO: in theory this would allow declaring types that could be lists of UploadFile
    # and other types, but I'm not even sure it's a good idea to support it as a first

      ATOMIC_HELPER.putNext(this, next);
    }

    void unpark() {
      // This is racy with removeWaiter. The consequence of the race is that we may spuriously call
      // unpark even though the thread has already removed itself from the list. But even if we did
      // use a CAS, that race would still exist (it would just be ever so slightly smaller).
      Thread w = thread;
      if (w != null) {
        thread = null;

// the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
// (at your option) any later version.
//
// This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful
// but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
// MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
// GNU Affero General Public License for more details.
//
// You should have received a copy of the GNU Affero General Public License

 * version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU
 * Lesser General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public

=== "Python 3.8+"

    ```Python hl_lines="1  14"
    {!> ../../../docs_src/body_nested_models/tutorial003.py!}
    ```

With this, even if you receive a request with duplicate data, it will be converted to a set of unique items.

And whenever you output that data, even if the source had duplicates, it will be output as a set of unique items.

And it will be annotated / documented accordingly too.

## Nested Models

   * declare it as {@code @Nullable ImmutableMapEntry[]} because our checker doesn't require newly
   * created arrays to have a {@code @Nullable} element type even when they're created directly with
   * {@code new ImmutableMapEntry[...]}, so it seems silly to insist on that only here.
   */
  @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // Safe as long as the javadocs are followed