[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1847?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12970821#action_12970821
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-1847:
-------------------------------------------
should we add an instanceof check for HeapByteBuffer then? seems like it's
probably worth it.
> ByteBufferUtil.clone shouldn't mutate the passed bytebuffer
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-1847
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1847
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core
> Affects Versions: 0.7.0 rc 2
> Reporter: T Jake Luciani
> Assignee: T Jake Luciani
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: 1847-v2.txt, 1847_v1.txt
>
>
> Currently ByteBufferUtil.clone uses .mark and .reset on the passed ByteBuffer.
> This is fine when using thrift because no two ByteBuffer are being accessed
> at the same time, but this could be thread-unsafe if the same BB was passed
> concurrently.
> Solandra is having problems with this (Solandra shares JVM with Cassandra).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
