[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2291?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12470252
]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2291:
----------------------------------------------
>From a quick search there are around thirty places in Derby that use
>Thread.wait(). Should there be timeouts on all of those as well? Or what makes
>latching unique that a timeout would be required?
I assume that a simple synchronized wait that's contained within a single
object would not need a timeout since one could believe that code inspection
and testing could demonstrate no chance for deadlock.
With latching now localized to the page object I assume we must be closer to a
simpler model than before, I wonder if time would be better spent analyzing the
code to prove deadlocks cannot occur or modifiying any api to remove the chance
of an incorrect calling sequence that could lead to a deadlock.
> Add timeout on latch wait
> -------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2291
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2291
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Store
> Affects Versions: 10.3.0.0
> Reporter: Knut Anders Hatlen
> Priority: Minor
>
> If a bug causes a dead lock in the latching, Derby may hang infinitely. A
> timeout could make it easier to detect the cause of the hang.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
