[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3401?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12600480#action_12600480
]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-3401:
-------------------------------------------
Thanks for looking at the patch Kristian. Since the different handling of null
in client versus embedded is an existing issue, I filed a new bug (DERBY-3695)
that I plan to address separately. You're quite right that it causes a
NullPointerException on the client.
> Removing a ConnectionEventListener from a PooledConnection during its
> connectionClosed() callback causes other ConnectionEventListener callbacks to
> be missed
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-3401
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-3401
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JDBC
> Affects Versions: 10.4.1.3
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Assignee: Knut Anders Hatlen
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: d3401-statement_events.diff, d3401-statement_events.stat
>
>
> A ConnectionEventListener should be able to remove itself as a listener
> during a callback without affecting any other callbacks.
> DataSourceTest.subtestPooledRemoveListenerOnClose() tests the scenario but
> calls to it will be commented out in the fixture testPooledReuseOnClose()
> (using this bug number).
> Issue is that such a remove will modify the eventListener Vector in
> EmbedPooledConnection while it is being enumerated over.
> An idea for a fix would be to first change the Vector over to a new-style
> collection, such as an implementation of List, then work off a copy of the
> collection when calling the callbacks. I don't think eventListener needs to
> be a synchronized collection, its access should be already synchronized on
> EmbedPooledConnection.
> I imagine that a similar issue exists for adding a new callback during
> callback processing, fixing this bug would fix that issue as well though no
> tests have been written for the add case.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
