HBASE-27064 CME in TestRegionNormalizerWorkQueue #4468
Merged
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
|
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
spotless:apply |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
Latest precommit is good. |
|
Rebased. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
|
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
virajjasani
approved these changes
May 30, 2022
| takeLock.unlock(); | ||
| putLock.unlock(); | ||
| lock = new ReentrantReadWriteLock(); | ||
| notEmpty = lock.writeLock().newCondition(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Basically we are changing notEmpty from being readLock Condition to writeLock Condition, this seems good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ReentrantReadWriteLock does not support Conditions on the readLock. It would throw UnsupportedOperationException.
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2022
Signed-off-by: Viraj Jasani <vjasani@apache.org>
asfgit
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2022
Signed-off-by: Viraj Jasani <vjasani@apache.org>
ndimiduk
reviewed
May 31, 2022
| */ | ||
| @InterfaceAudience.Private | ||
| class RegionNormalizerWorkQueue<E> { | ||
|
|
||
| /** Underlying storage structure that gives us the Set behavior and FIFO retrieval policy. */ | ||
| private LinkedHashSet<E> delegate; | ||
|
|
||
| // the locking structure used here follows the example found in LinkedBlockingQueue. The |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's super concerning that there's an issue here because, per this comment, the implementation follows the locking implementation of LinkedBlockingQueue.
wenwj0
pushed a commit
to wenwj0/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 14, 2022
Signed-off-by: Viraj Jasani <vjasani@apache.org>
wenwj0
added a commit
to wenwj0/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 14, 2022
This reverts commit a93ea9e.
vinayakphegde
pushed a commit
to vinayakphegde/hbase
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2024
…e) to 2.4 (apache#4794) (apache#4468) Co-authored-by: Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Viraj Jasani <vjasani@apache.org> (cherry picked from commit f24e7b5) Change-Id: Ie277a2e130456a45757c2ef9ffdaa2ee8cb52c26
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.
My impression after a quick read of the code is the separate locks
putLockandtakeLockshould be unified as a reentrant read-write lock.