[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12593?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15034044#comment-15034044
]
Sangjin Lee commented on HADOOP-12593:
--------------------------------------
+1 on what [[email protected]] suggested. How about using this to review all
unsafe uses of volatiles, mainly in the context of using compound operations
(++, +=, etc.)? [~cmccabe] already flagged one. Volatile
int/short/byte/double/float are no different in this regard, so they should be
reviewed too.
> multiple "volatile long" field declarations exist in the Hadoop codebase
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-12593
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12593
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.8.0
> Reporter: Steve Loughran
> Priority: Minor
>
> If you get your IDE to scan for "volatile long", you find 20-30 entries.
> Volatile operations on `long` variables are not guaranteed to be atomic, so
> these usages can be vulnerable to race conditions generating invalid data.
> they need to be replaced by AtomicLong references, except in the specific
> case that you want performance values for statistics, and are prepared to
> take the risk
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
