[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10590?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14002041#comment-14002041
]
Benoy Antony commented on HADOOP-10590:
---------------------------------------
We had a an error where authorization policy checks returned inconsistent
results on a cluster.
Looking at the code , that inconsistency is possible due to the visibility
issues of the code.
As you commented, there is a cost for volatile vs non-volatile. The
performance of volatile depends heavily on the CPU architecture .
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4633866/is-volatile-expensive .
I'll try benchmarking the change, but not sure if that's very useful since
performance of volatile varies wildly across CPU architectures. I believe, the
main decision will be correctness vs performance.
> ServiceAuthorizationManager is not threadsafe
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-10590
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10590
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: security
> Affects Versions: 2.4.0
> Reporter: Benoy Antony
> Assignee: Benoy Antony
> Attachments: HADOOP-10590.patch
>
>
> The mutators in ServiceAuthorizationManager are synchronized. The accessors
> are not synchronized.
> This results in visibility issues when ServiceAuthorizationManager's state
> is accessed from different threads.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
